Subject:
|
Re: Swearing?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 5 Jan 2000 03:33:25 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
johnneal@uswestSPAMLESS.net
|
Viewed:
|
1948 times
|
| |
|
|
Matthew Miller wrote:
> 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?
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
>
>
> --
> Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
> Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
>
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Swearing?
|
| (...) I think that what you're doing is creating a restricted redefinition of what art is. Historically, art has had a much broader meaning than the one you'd like to assign to it. (People even say this sarcastically: "Oh, that doesn't have to be (...) (25 years ago, 5-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
