Subject: RE: The Aesthetic [was RE: Daumier-Smith and Empathy]
From: Cecilia Baader (ceciliabaader@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Jul 31 2001 - 17:46:53 GMT
--- Sean Draine <seandr@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> Social phenomenon are inherent complicated and soft around the edges,
> so this doesn't give you a clear way to determine whether or not
> a given artifact is a work of art.
Okay, but calling art a function of a social phenomenon doesn't
necessarily preclude my definition, that art is truth. Though I don't
disagree with you, either. Socially speaking, if someone recognizes a
sort of truth in what they are seeing/hearing/reading, that person is
more likely to deem it art. If someone recognizes a truth that they
don't necessarily agree with in the work, they are also going to call it
art. Crappy art, but art.
Regards,
Cecilia.
(I feel like I should be standing amidst columns wearing robes and
avoiding hemlock-bearers.)
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Mon Sep 10 2001 - 15:29:40 GMT