on 6/07/2003 00:17, Walt Wayman at hiwayman@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> If you're one of those and
> have nothing better to do, this is worth a read:
>
> http://volokh.com
>
> OM content: Absolutely none. So sue me.
>
> Good night, y'all.
>
> Walt
Thanks for this link, Walt. Interesting indeed.
I consider the author refers to a quite important issue when he writes:
> But as I listened, I could not help but think. . . .
>
> What is real, and what is faux? They weren't really Pink Floyd. But they were
> really playing all the Pink
> Floyd songs I like pretty much the way I remember them. And I had never seen
> or heard the real Pink Floyd
> in person, only their recordings. So which was "real"? Obviously both are
> literally real, but then what is
> "faux"? These guys playing their hearts out in front of me, or my ancient
> vinyl LPs with electronic analogue
> impulses from a studio session 30 years ago? Then I thought. . . .
Regretably, I can only quote U.Eco on this issue in Spanish. Rather than his
filosophical/aesthetical analysis, I thought the ending paragraphs of
chapter 18 in 'Il pendolo di Foucault' have a stunning impact.
OM content: it is quite related to photography, me thinks... and computer
science too.
Fernando.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|