From: IN%"[email protected]" "Art Criticism Discussion Forum" 25-APR-1993
17:02:24.73
To: IN%"HRL@xxxxxxxxxxxx" "Howard Lawrence"
CC:
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
<01GXFOY1KHSS8WVYK1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 25 Apr 1993 17:02 EDT
Received: From PSUVM(MAILER) by PSUARCH with Jnet id 5712 for HRL@PSUARCH; Sun,
25 Apr 1993 17:02 EST
Received: from PSUVM.PSU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@PSUVM) by PSUVM.PSU.EDU
(LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 5731; Sun, 25 Apr 1993 16:56:19 -0400
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 15:56:13 CDT
From: Paul Brown <brown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: abstract
Sender: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
To: Howard Lawrence <HRL@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
Message-id: <01GXFOY1KHSS8WVYK1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-To: ARTCRIT%YORKVM1.BITNET@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 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?
>
I was using the term alienation in repect of the "outsider" mentality
where the artist takes an essentially detached-alienated position in
order to comment on society and its deeds.
In contrast what i was trying to refer to as "cool" abstraction was
artists who were more interested in formal relationships than
personal beliefs (prejudice, hangups).
This seems to me to be significantly different though I acknowledge
your comment that these artists were often trying to undermine the
"art-viewer-reality" relationship. Your use of the word "alienating"
is quite different from my own. Provoking viewers to think for
themselves is quite different from "feeling alienated".
It seems this discussion may be creating polarity between content and
form where both groups of artists insist they deal with the
"significant" component of the message.
Paul
brown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
editor, FineArt Forum
17:02:24.73
To: IN%"HRL@xxxxxxxxxxxx" "Howard Lawrence"
CC:
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
<01GXFOY1KHSS8WVYK1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 25 Apr 1993 17:02 EDT
Received: From PSUVM(MAILER) by PSUARCH with Jnet id 5712 for HRL@PSUARCH; Sun,
25 Apr 1993 17:02 EST
Received: from PSUVM.PSU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@PSUVM) by PSUVM.PSU.EDU
(LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 5731; Sun, 25 Apr 1993 16:56:19 -0400
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1993 15:56:13 CDT
From: Paul Brown <brown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: abstract
Sender: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
To: Howard Lawrence <HRL@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
Message-id: <01GXFOY1KHSS8WVYK1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-To: ARTCRIT%YORKVM1.BITNET@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 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?
>
I was using the term alienation in repect of the "outsider" mentality
where the artist takes an essentially detached-alienated position in
order to comment on society and its deeds.
In contrast what i was trying to refer to as "cool" abstraction was
artists who were more interested in formal relationships than
personal beliefs (prejudice, hangups).
This seems to me to be significantly different though I acknowledge
your comment that these artists were often trying to undermine the
"art-viewer-reality" relationship. Your use of the word "alienating"
is quite different from my own. Provoking viewers to think for
themselves is quite different from "feeling alienated".
It seems this discussion may be creating polarity between content and
form where both groups of artists insist they deal with the
"significant" component of the message.
Paul
brown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
editor, FineArt Forum