--- authfriend wrote:
> In many if not most cases, great art finds a way to
> transform or transcend the suffering it deals with,
> to make it positive; that's why it's so compelling.


I've observed two extremes in art; one you might call 
the "pure beauty" school and one you might call the 
"cathartic" school. The Pure Beauty school is like Monet's 
water lilies -- very pretty. The Cathartic school may or 
may not have the obvious beauty of the Beauty school, 
but whatever it has, it juxtaposes it with pain, and may 
even heal the pain in the process.

People who've visited the University of Iowa Museum 
of Art may have seen the Nazi Drawings of Mauricio 
Lasansky. That's an example of the Cathartic school.
Work that's horrible to contemplate, but too compelling
not to contemplate.

I thought my 'ru buddy Pam would acknowledge the 
Cathartic school becaue it operates somewhat the way 
transcending releases stress, but she was adamant that 
artists do people a disservice to be anything but positive. 
It was the classic "no negativity" TMO position lamented 
here on occasion.

But that was 20 years ago. I don't know what her position 
might be today.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing

To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to: 
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to