From: Carl Weese (cweese@earthlink.net)
Date: 08/19/02-06:25:48 AM Z
Christopher Lovenguth wrote:
>
It is much
> more important to the art movement as a whole that people think then it is
> for objects to be made well (if at all).
Christopher,
What art movement as a whole? I'm not aware of this entity.
Let's leave aside for a moment what's "important" and consider instead
what's possible. You can't make an object without thinking. You can
think without making an object. Thinking is important. But thinking
about making art while doing it is redundant self-conciousness: if
you're making art you're thinking already. Thinking about thinking about
making art is called writer's block.
The hypothetical of folks snapping away at a pepper long enough to come
up with a Weston is no more convincing than the old roomful of monkeys
at typewriters composing Hamlet.
Someone once said the world is divided into two groups, people who
divide everything into two groups, and people who don't. I don't think
the two camps you've posited describe a real state of affairs, and I
doubt much art of any value is produced by people who are concerned with
what camp or group they belong in. It takes time and energy away from
doing the art.
I do agree that it's best left up to historians and curators of the
future to define what movements were instead of worrying about what they
are: artists are better off spending the present doing their work, and
even thinking about it.
---Carl
-- Web Site with picture galleries and workshop information http://home.earthlink.net/~cweese/index.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 09/19/02-11:02:49 AM Z CST