Re: [idm] understanding art (and all the other crap we are always yapping about.)
Msg-Id:
<0GDC0095KH3FL0@cmcl2.nyu.edu>
Mbox:
idm.0105.gz
quoted 8 lines ["setre ." <drakt@hotmail.com>]>["setre ." <drakt@hotmail.com>]
>> > i just disagree with the separation of art
>> > and expression.
>>
>> when did this happen? is this just a personal thing or was it ever
>> publically announced that art is no longer expression?
>
>Yea, it was publicly announced as a part of "post-modernism."
Art in postmodernity is still expression it just "expresses" a way more complex view of the world.
Think about the difference btw early Miles Davis and Bitches Brew era Miles Davis. Rigid structure vs controlled chaos.
In the 50's-60's the world was thought of as an essentially structured place. Artists expressed this. After the 70's though the consensus was different -media saturation, global communications etc. gave the
average person a more multifaceted view of the world. Artists expressed this. Punk, electric Miles etc. Which one is more valid as art? Early Miles or bitches brew?
BUT to say that every artist in a given era must represent the world in the dominant way is silly.
Early house/Techno was not postmodern. Bob Ross is not postmodern. By the definition of postmodern(see the condition of postmodernity by David Harvey) William S. Burroughs is the ultimate example of the post
modern artist although he wrote most of his books during the height of modernism.
Emile L'Eplattenier | p: 631-261-6030 | egl204@is9.nyu.edu | emilel@nerve.com
"Style is the fringe benefit of intention."-Julian Schnabel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org