Re:'I wasn't quoting you, Derek, (suggesting that you, rather than I, should read more carefully) but the simplistic idea that you so often criticize as if it had currency; to wit, the notion that western aesthetics degrades non-western-Euro centric art by forcing it to be rated by pro western standards. '
But, precisely, I say no such thing!! As I say, you see what you want to see. DA On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 11:06 AM, William Conger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I wasn't quoting you, Derek, (suggesting that you, > rather than I, should read more carefully) but the > simplistic idea that you so often criticize as if it > had currency; to wit, the notion that western > aesthetics degrades non-western-Euro centric art by > forcing it to be rated by pro western standards. What > I said was that none of my teachers ever proposed > judging non western art by purely western standards. > > In fact, I agree with your basic point but disagree > that it has much validity anymore. I think it is a > red herring. > > However, I also think it's partially true that to even > say for example "African Art" is to impose a frame of > neo-colonialism on non-western art. Yet it is > convenient and essentially neutral to examine artworks > by geographic units. Further, in African art, for > instance, each tribe had quite distinctive formal > modes of practice and thus we can safely say that some > sort of aesthetic, sympathetic to western ideas about > form, was/is identifiable. What is different of > course is purpose, however magical we may say it is. > > Many times I've had cause to remind you that very > simple and naive ideas about art history are not being > promoted anymore -- given that art history as a > subject has grown up a lot in the "post colonial" era > and is now deeply enmeshed with Anthropology, culture > studies, and other disciplines, not to mention that > bugaboo, Theory. I'm not suggesting that you hold > those outmoded ideas but that you continually assume > that others, your fellow listers, do. This false > assumption is a roadblock to discussion. > > Whatever the value of Malraux's outlook on art, he is > not in extreme opposition to current mainstream > thinking on the topic, and perhaps never was. His > enemy -- never daunting -- has left the field long > ago. It would be more useful for our discussions if > you, the acknowledged expert of Malrtaux here, would > help to integrate his views, and yours, with current > mainstream thinking instead of reverting to an > unnecessary defense on an abandoned battlefield. > > WC > > > I think there is > --- Derek Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Re: ' I don't recall a >> single instance of being told that such art should >> be >> evaluated by western standards" >> >> Where do you get this from William? It's a silly >> distortion of what I said. >> >> Your continual, unpleasant innuendos about >> "scholarly" standards >> clashes badly your own apparent inabilty to read >> with care. I have >> often noticed this in discussions with you. You see >> what you want to >> see. >> >> DA >> >> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 11:37 PM, William Conger >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > I'm not grappling with Derek but I am discounting >> his >> > so-called arguments. He does not offer arguments >> if >> > by that we mean reasoned inductive or deductive >> > process, supported by specific evidence, >> reference, >> > and, yes, informed opinion. Instead we get >> summative >> > opinion, the appeal to authority, himself. I've >> read >> > some of his website essays and I think they are >> > extremely well written, persuasive, clear. But >> even >> > there, in his remarks supporting Malraux, there is >> an >> > absense of specific interpretation backed up by >> > Malraux's own words or contested by the reasoning >> of >> > other writers on the same topics. >> > >> > As for non-western art and the idea that it is >> > misunderstood, I think this outlook has been well >> > established for decades. Fifty years ago, in my >> > undergraduate college years I had courses in >> > non-western art: Prehistoric, African, Oceanic, >> > Japanese, Chinese, Indian and related topics in >> four >> > different American universities. I don't recall a >> > single instance of being told that such art should >> be >> > evaluated by western standards (although as a >> learning >> > artist I did admire its "design"). Perhaps I was >> > especially fortunate in being taught by >> enlightened >> > people but there was also an abundance of >> scholarly >> > and even general literature that clarified the >> > distinction between the European aesthetic and >> the >> > purposes of other artforms. A look at the index >> and >> > publication dates in any good library will justify >> my >> > comment. So I think Derek is making a big deal of >> > something that's actually quite commonly >> understood by >> > educated people (such as the listers here) and has >> > been for quite a long time. Thus Derek stresses >> an >> > elementary point. And in defending Derek, so >> does >> > Cheerskep. >> > >> > WC >> > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Derek Allan >> > http://www.home.netspeed.com.au/derek.allan/default.htm > > -- Derek Allan http://www.home.netspeed.com.au/derek.allan/default.htm
