Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] The fine line between art and pornography
From: "Jim McIntyre" <mcintyre@ca.inter.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 23:17:26 -0500
References: <BCEKKGNGDPMOIPMEJONBAEGMDFAA.phong@doan-ltd.com> <008001c3c04c$b7fd8ac0$fa5d6244@ph.cox.net>

If one of the objectives is art is provoke and spawn discussion, I think in
this case it worked. Is it good art, lasting art, significant art or
inspired art? Probably not. But hey, it certainly got people to sit up and
respond. And maybe, just maybe, someone will get pissed off enough to go out
and do something more timeless, just to "prove" a point. The means may be
suspect, but if the effect is energize -- negatively or positivly -- then
the end is perhaps justified.

I went to art school way back when. I can remember a class where the prof
projected a series of abstract paintings. The class critiqued the artist's
colour choice, debated whether certain images exhibited more "energy" or
"tension" than others. After the debate was over, the prof then revealed
that all the paintings had been painted by chimpanzes. Along with being
really teed off that we had been "had", it certainly made some of us stop
and think about what "art" was. I still don't know, really. There is no
answer other than the answer from future generations. Mozart 200+ years
later is still incrediable. This guy will be gone, just a "phootnote"....
But it's nice to see photography debates along with single malt discussions
;-)

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com> (Re: [Leica] The fine line between art and pornography)
In reply to: Message from "Phong" <phong@doan-ltd.com> (RE: [Leica] The fine line between art and pornography)
Message from "Steve Barbour" <kididdoc@cox.net> (Re: [Leica] The fine line between art and pornography)