SMF - Just Installed!
- Welcome to droqen's forum-shaped notebook. Please log in.
Recent posts
#1
Poems to remember things by / Re: touch
Last post by droqen - July 07, 2025, 12:49:53 PMyou touched me
YOU TOUCHED ME
you were playing the game
and i only tried
to play along too.
you were playing with me
and i only tried
to guess at the rules
to escape them
to push.
you were playing
and i only tried
not to freeze
not to show i was clueless
not to cry.
you weren't kind, were you?
and i only tried
to imagine a world in which you were kind
to me.
YOU TOUCHED ME
you were playing the game
and i only tried
to play along too.
you were playing with me
and i only tried
to guess at the rules
to escape them
to push.
you were playing
and i only tried
not to freeze
not to show i was clueless
not to cry.
you weren't kind, were you?
and i only tried
to imagine a world in which you were kind
to me.
#2
Close reading / Re: What art is
Last post by droqen - July 07, 2025, 12:24:53 PMokay, this was quite a good book. i skimmed, i skipped great portions, and i may yet return to it for i've left it full of holes.
i like the way it ends. i like its structure: i find it quite inspiring. not as inspiring as Christopher Alexander's book-structures, but, usually i come away from a book sort of irritated with how they chose to lay out their ideas. not so with What art is.
i enjoyed my time with the book and i found the final chapter interesting, thought-provoking.
i like the way it ends. i like its structure: i find it quite inspiring. not as inspiring as Christopher Alexander's book-structures, but, usually i come away from a book sort of irritated with how they chose to lay out their ideas. not so with What art is.
i enjoyed my time with the book and i found the final chapter interesting, thought-provoking.
#4
Close reading / Re: What art is
Last post by droqen - July 07, 2025, 12:19:57 PMQuotep 149
My theory, in brief, is that works of art are embodied meanings. Because of works like Warhol's Brillo Box, Icould not claim that aesthetics is part of the definition of art. That is not to deny that aesthetics is part of art! It is definitely a feature. . .
p 150-151
. . . it is . . . false to say that aesthetics is the point of visual art. . . . But if aesthetics is not the point of art, what is the point of aesthetics?
This is too swift. I don't want to deny that there may be art, the point of which is aesthetic. . . but I can say that most of the art being made today does not have the provision of aesthetic experience as its main goal. And I don't think that was the main goal of most of the art made in the course of art history. . . . Now, it would be a major transformation in artistic practice if artists were to begin making art, the point and purpose f which was aesthetic experience. That would really be a revolution.
#5
Close reading / Re: What art is
Last post by droqen - July 07, 2025, 12:15:13 PMQuotep 146
I have said at times that if the indiscernible objects--Brillo Box and the Brillo carton--were perceptually alike, they must be aesthetically alike as well, but I no longer believe this true, mainly because of having brought some better philosophy to bear on the issue.
fascinating. i like this. i believe that what Danto is referring to here is the aesthetics of the invisible, that is, the aesthetics of the meaning and its embodiment, not only of the material object but the way that the meaning is attached to the object. i like also that Danto refers again and again to the same work, Brillo Box, and to the same concepts, visiting and revisiting differently. this is a good way to show the depth of a concept.
#6
Close reading / Re: What art is
Last post by droqen - July 07, 2025, 12:11:58 PMCHAPTER SIX
THE FUTURE OF AESTHETICS
oh hell yeahTHE FUTURE OF AESTHETICS
#7
Close reading / Re: What art is
Last post by droqen - July 07, 2025, 12:11:16 PMchapter "THE END OF THE CONTEST"
the title of this chapter refers, at first, to the contest between different art forms, in particular painting vs photography
on p 115:
you can do or choose to do this with anything, any medium, any object.
i get it.
so how does he end it?
the title of this chapter refers, at first, to the contest between different art forms, in particular painting vs photography
on p 115:
QuoteThe great thing about the sixties was the dawning recognition that anything could be a work of arti.e. as long as it is a waking dream, as long as it is an object imbued with meaning or which embodies meaning.
you can do or choose to do this with anything, any medium, any object.
i get it.
Quotewhy weren't [the original Brillo boxes] artworks if Andy's Factory-produced boxes were? I have answered this in my first chapterok, this is good. this is good. i think that it's a very good thing that Danto refers back to the first chapter: he isn't going to rug-pull me in the conclusion and say, oh, here's what i really meant this whole time. no, he opens with his idea of what art is. the rest of the book is just... exploration of a space. beautiful! i love it! as a structure, i really love this.
so how does he end it?
#8
Close reading / Re: What art is
Last post by droqen - July 07, 2025, 12:05:14 PM"the End of Art"! Danto, a man after my own heart. i love proclaiming the end of things.
p.s. Danto is dead, so, the End of Danto has already occurred. may he rest in peace.
also, the first chapter is over. what do i think of it? {IV.} danto is trying to define art. that's the whole point of the book, right? he has laid his thoughts out here, constructing supporting evidence before making his point... i don't know, it gives me a smell like Keogh's The Videogame Industry Does Not Exist where he finally concludes the book after however many hundred pages with the full statement, "The videogame industry doesn't exist--at least not without an entire cultural field of videogame production to support it."
i'm going to skip now to the end past all of Danto's structure to see: does he get to the point?
p.s. Danto is dead, so, the End of Danto has already occurred. may he rest in peace.
also, the first chapter is over. what do i think of it? {IV.} danto is trying to define art. that's the whole point of the book, right? he has laid his thoughts out here, constructing supporting evidence before making his point... i don't know, it gives me a smell like Keogh's The Videogame Industry Does Not Exist where he finally concludes the book after however many hundred pages with the full statement, "The videogame industry doesn't exist--at least not without an entire cultural field of videogame production to support it."
i'm going to skip now to the end past all of Danto's structure to see: does he get to the point?
#9
Close reading / Re: What art is
Last post by droqen - July 07, 2025, 11:19:51 AMQuotep 48-49
I . . . define art as "wakeful dreams." . . . everyone, everywhere, dreams. Usually this requires that we sleep. But wakeful dreams require of us that we be awake. . . . they can be shared. They are accordingly not private. . .
. . . One argument for the End of Art is that it rests on the fact that art and reality are in certain cases indiscernible. I thought if art and reality were indiscernible, we had somehow come to the end. Art and reality could and principle be visibly the same. But I had not realized at the time that the differences are invisible, . . . they [can] have different meanings and different embodiments.
#10
Close reading / Re: What art is
Last post by droqen - July 07, 2025, 11:11:57 AMQuotep 46-47
Warhol at first thought he would save money and labor by using ordinary cardboard boxes from the wholesaler. But the edges and corners were too soft and rounded. They were inconsistent with his vision. So he had to take the route of fabrication and stenciling. The stencil gave perfect similarity, but you could not stencil the physical properties of the box. Cardboard is perfect for shipping but not for geometry, whose properties Warhol wanted for his boxes. Sharp corners and edges, as Judd was aware, belong to a dream of exactitude.
i didn't know this. interesting.