Well, you make a good point. These things are of course art, but what gets called
"art" nowadays is almost by definition the art that is *not* popular, in other words,
"the stuff that most people don't like."
Why? I haven't a clue--
AK
Josh Ronsen wrote:
> Ann Klefstad writes
>
> >...most of the world is "anti-art." The world mostly dislikes and distrusts
> >most artmaking and would like it to go away.
>
> It depends how you define art. Do you think Madonna's music is art? Or the latest
>Hollywood blockbuster? If these things, clearly supported by millions (in Western
>culture) aren't "art", why aren't they?
>
> Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this thread, many interesting points have
>been made. In the next few days I will try to compile the main points of what
>everyone has contributed. I don't know if I understand things any better, but I have
>a lot more thoughts to digest from people whose thoughts I would want to digest...
>
> -Josh Ronsen
> http://www.nd.org/jronsen
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> --== Sent via Deja.com ==--
> http://www.deja.com/
