On 11/14/2012 2:31 PM, Tina Manley wrote:
> PESO:
>
> This is a letter from the New York TImes Book Review. Do you agree that
> you can create art only when it's your intention to do so?
No.
Conversely, many times work with the intention of creating art - doesn't.
But, from a German poster I loved long ago: "Was ist das Kunst?"
I do not think that "art" inheres in any object. I believe it is an interior
result of interaction within the one
sensing the object. Thus, anything may be art, and anything, whether
experienced as art by others, at the same time and
place or the same person or others elsewhere/elsewhen, may not be art to one
experiencing it in the moment.
Because of many shared commonalities between people, from aspects of the
Collective Unconscious to local sensibilities,
groups of people can easily have common responses, and judge some objects as
art at a collective level.
None of that changes the inherent qualities of the object. The operation of the
psychological phenomenon of projection
means that different people will tend to see the same object differently, or,
in some cases, simply not notice the
object at all. What we 'see', 'hear', etc. is not only a function of what our
physical senses respond to, but how the
neural signals from them are processed.
Anyone who believes they know what is and is not art for anyone but themselves
is delusional.
To paraphrase Supreme Court Justice's brief concurrence to the decision in a
pornography case. "Art is impossible to
define, but I know it when I see it."
He later recanted in another case: in which he accepted that his prior view was
simply untenable. But that's the Law,
not Art. :-)
Critical Mass Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|