Subject:
|
Re: Swearing?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 5 Jan 2000 03:20:00 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
mattdm@mattdm.SPAMLESSorg
|
Viewed:
|
1932 times
|
| |
|
|
John Neal <johnneal@uswest.net> wrote:
> > 2. It must provoke emotion in some/most viewers. (it need not be a
> > pleasant response)
> Why not?
Because art has a much wider scope than that.
Would you say that Picasso's Guernica is not art?
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Swearing?
|
| (...) Well, it's certainly a political statement about a horrible event. On that level no, although one can marvel as to how Picasso's fracturing, cubist style creates a mood of chaos and tension. It is arguable either way. -John (...) (25 years ago, 5-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Swearing?
|
| (...) Agreed. (...) Why not? (...) By whom? (...) What you missed was that I was specifically referring to those "artists" who created the works described by Christopher Lannan: "A crucifix submerged in a jar of urine or a Madonna with feces for (...) (25 years ago, 5-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
