ART: Abstract.

From: IN%"[email protected]" "Art Criticism Discussion Forum" 25-APR-1993
To: IN%"[email protected]" "Howard Lawrence"
Subj: RE: abstract

Return-path: <[email protected]>
Return-path: ARTCRIT <@PSUVM.PSU.EDU:[email protected]>
Received: from Jnet-DAEMON by ARCH.PSU.EDU (PMDF #12866) id
<[email protected]>; Sun, 25 Apr 1993 15:41 EDT
Received: From PSUVM(MAILER) by PSUARCH with Jnet id 2473 for [email protected]; Sun,
25 Apr 1993 15:41 EST
Received: from PSUVM.PSU.EDU (NJE origin [email protected]) by PSUVM.PSU.EDU
(LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 3467; Sun, 25 Apr 1993 15:35:17 -0400
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 14:31:43 CDT
From: Paul G Kosidowski <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: abstract
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>; from "Paul Brown" at Apr
24, 93 5:25 pm
Sender: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
Reply-to: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
Message-id: <[email protected]>
X-To: ARTCRIT%[email protected]

> I'm concerned that the current discussion on abstraction
> uses the term principally about expressionism.
> What about the "cool" abstraction of constructivism,
> de stijl, systems art, etc...
> This (latter) is not an art of alienation and most of the
> comments posted don't relate to it at all.
> Paul
> [email protected]
> editor, FineArt Forum

Not an art of alienation? I don't know about that. Just because this work
doesn't have the connotation of gut-wrenching, soul-baring, hard-drinking,
screw-you-if-you-don't-understand-it machismo doesn't mean that it is
essentially "alienating." Most of the work you cite, after all, is concerned
with disorienting the codified art-viewer-reality relationship, I would say
to "alienate" the viewer from the relationship to art that he or she is
accustomed to. Comments?

| Paul Kosidowski |
| [email protected] |
| |
| Modern Studies |
| U of Wisconsin-Milwaukee |
| Milwaukee, Wisconsin |
| |
| |
| Life always has the last word|
| --Le Corbusier |
Partial thread listing: