I agree. I prefer art that is self explanatory and appeals to the onlooker/listener without needing a theory to support it.
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Dennis DeSantis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. April 2004 13:24 An: ha Cc: [email protected] Betreff: Re: (313) the future ha wrote: > maybe it > wouldn't be very entertaining and maybe you wouldn't even have to actually > see / hear it to get the idea To get the idea of the concept, maybe. But to get the idea of the artistic experience? Absurd. THIS is the sort of reductio ad absurdum situation that purely conceptual "art" can lead to. If the entire weight of the art can be summarized in the writings about the art, then where's the art? If the real meat of your work is in your program notes/explanations/justifications, then why call yourself a composer/painter/sculptor? That particular breed of artist is worth absolutely nothing to me. -- Dennis DeSantis www.dennisdesantis.com
