ART: Visual Communication?

From: IN%"[email protected]" "Art Criticism Discussion Forum" 12-OCT-199
2
16:30:57.44
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
CC:
Subj: RE: thinking about art

Message-id: <[email protected]>
Received: from JNET-DAEMON by PSUARCH.Bitnet; Mon, 12 Oct 92 16:30 EDT
Received: From PSUVM(MAILER) by PSUARCH with Jnet id 3658 for HRL@PSUARCH; Mon,
12 Oct 92 16:30 EDT
Received: by PSUVM (Mailer R2.08) id 6873; Mon, 12 Oct 92 16:24:14 EDT
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:08:00 CDT
From: [email protected]
Subject: RE: thinking about art
Sender: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
Reply-to: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>

Is visual art visual communication? If so, then is it important
for an artist to make certain there is clear lines of
communication? If this is the case then redundancy, via
verbal/written interpretation of the artwork becomes, at the
very least, helpful. If communication is not the reason for
visual art, then perhaps there is no need for an artist
to ever verbalize about a work and the modernist adage "the
art speaks for itself" is all that is necessary. Isn't this,
however an elitist position to take?
Partial thread listing: