Hi all!!
I'm back online after a month hiatus (in case you didn't notice). Japan was
WONDERFUL. I wanna move.
But anyway, to be on topic, I totally agree with Darryl: after spending a
semester defining art, beauty, and how beauty places in art nowadays,
getting all down to some nice "high concept" sentences I can live with.
Shoulda talked to Darryl first.
My art def includes Darryl's observation, that who determines what "art" is,
is certainly not the artist, though we sure wish it could be that way
(Howtan comes to mind...). So it lets us off the hook--we don't have to
worry about it! Just do your thing and the rest may (or may not) follow.
I divvied it up into four categories: mass culture and cognescenti, current
and future both. What is fascinating to me is when the two don't agree (on
what is/isn't art) and what changes from present to future, one way or the
other. One of these days, you all, velvet Elvises will be worth millions...
When I start getting into these quandaries it is much better to go back into
my darkroom and get to work. With or without a crappy camera.
Missed you guys!!!!!!
Chris
PS Ryuji, I DID buy washi in Japan--howdja guess?
----- (biggie-san snip from Darryl)
> Having qualified (??) why I've returned to the topic I have a brief
> comment about the "Art" thing. We (artists) don't get to qualify what
> is or isn't art, it is decided for a culture/society by other (some
> current, some future) players in the mix; seldom are these players the
> actual artists involved.
Received on Sun Jan 9 21:32:48 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 02/01/05-09:28:07 AM Z CST