I would prefer you excised your moderation job in a more unartistic, less biased way and took your responsibility as group owner more serious. But it seems this is only my preference.
> Am 19.09.2014 um 15:37 schrieb Molly <[email protected]>: > > art that is beautiful, art meant to disturb, art that pushes the technical > limits previously established, art constructed not to last like chalk on > sidewalks or sand sculptures on beaches - art comes in many forms and can be > as simple as a concept in Haiku or complicated as Mt. Rushmore. This age old > question, will it always be asked and answered? It does provide a platform > for good dialogue and self exploration. > >> On Thursday, September 18, 2014 9:05:40 AM UTC-4, archytas wrote: >> I agree Facil - though some definition of artist is required. What is this >> 'art' not part of 1000 channels with nothing on except the simulacrum of >> drivel, generally funded by advertising? I might point to Maxwell (perhaps >> both the great scientist and my dog) and Einstein. I've long wondered about >> art and people-community development - I'm floored by people using dance to >> work with disabled kids (as an example). Brian Bevan (rugby leaugue's >> record try scorer) was a work of art in action. Gabby might be see as such >> in another form of side-step. Not all art brings much reward. Allan and >> Andrew have a go, sometimes not at each other. Molly has often touched me >> deeply, even if so much of my experience has been 'dark side'. The >> chocolate box picture isn't art unless a child is smiling. >> >> Art may have some function in revealing such as 'change is the same thing' >> and the depravity of political words, the 'lie that tells us the truth' sort >> of stuff - but does the 'pipe' have to be painted by Magritte? One >> confronts this picture doing systems analysis - modelling the reality is not >> modelling the rhetoric. >> >>> On Thursday, 18 September 2014 00:31:17 UTC+1, facilitator wrote: >>> I don't think artists do, otherwise the term "starving artist" would be >>> applied less frequently. >>> >>>> On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 9:54:57 AM UTC-4, archytas wrote: >>>> Ms Tidulz says she has no gold and just looks at her claws when I suggest >>>> she should be replaced with a golden goose. Perhaps one needs a heretic >>>> cat? Do artists have some knack in spotting the drivel we 'all' want? >>>> >>>>>> > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google > Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/minds-eye/JaQa8KNDeo0/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
