[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Cute but stupid
- To: BOOK_ARTS-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
- Subject: Re: Cute but stupid
- From: Daria <dherlihy@TIAC.NET>
- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 12:26:56 -0500
- Message-Id: <199703251715.JAA14868@SUL-Server-2.Stanford.EDU>
- Sender: "The Book Arts: binding, typography, collecting" <BOOK_ARTS-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
Dear Lisa Cheung:
I notice that you work in a science facility and also are interested in the
arts. You have been honest in your criticism and deserve the good answers
you have already received.
To condense what could be lengthy, I would just like to give $.01 's worth:
Some of us trained in science have a certain mindset, I believe, that
tempers our reaction to the arts. We often want to know why,how,where, who,
quantitatively and qualitatively - instead of just sitting back and taking in
the experience emotionally. (And we bring along our cultural
biases,too - like everyone else!) Others just "feel" the image, whatever it is.
Those who are highly versed in the art of discourse can carry criticism
to ethereal heights of verbiosity. But ... It really is FUN to
synthesize a grand opus about artworks/bookworks, etc., from the rich data
bank in our educated mind. Words that spin and interact colorfully with many
shades of meaning.
An ancient friend of mine (who has painted 1024 artworks) said,-
provokes a reaction in viewers that has a social consequence". He says that if
an artwork brings "pleasure to a viewer" - that is wonderful, but in
the long run it is art for art's sake unless it brings about an idea and an
action that changes people's beliefs/lives - if only in a very small way.
My $.01 is heading for $.02 so I will cease and desist.
Let us hear from you again, Lisa.