Can you substantiate this in some manner that goes beyond your empirical understanding - of your present analysis which seems to lack any real cogent perspective - for the most part you seem to want to reduce this to a he says she says arguement Chair, Visual Arts and Technologies The Cleveland Institute of Art
> From: Derek Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: <[email protected]> > Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 09:10:55 +1000 > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Presence > > This is so hopelessly shaky historically speaking. For vast stretches > of history and for large numbers of objects we now regard as art, the > question of 'line of ownership' was entirely irrelevant. Ditto the > notion of 'exhibition.' The statues at Chartres were not on > 'exhibition', or Buddhist sculpture or so much else. That is Western > post-Renaissance thinking. Authenticity?? The very notion would not > have made sense. Ditto a million times over for 'cultural value'.
