Since several of us want to now examine "Lehrer's stated goal of creating a unified third culture in which science and literature can co-exist as peaceful, complementary equals" ---- perhaps we should examine a little further how a scientific view of looted artifacts conflicts with an aesthetic one.
Or -- even conflicts with a literary view -- if we ask whether Keats had any idea where his beloved Grecian Urn was excavated. Were William and the Archeology professor just being provocateurs when they called all un-scientifically excavated artifacts "knickknacks"? I don't think so. I think it's consistent with a scientific approach to culture - as well as with the historicist approach that dominates art theory. And yet -- nobody really wants to dismiss all the un-scientifically excavated artifacts in our art museums. do they ? (and that would amount to way, way over 50% of everything allegedly made before 1500.) I can't even think of a single exception in the A.I.C. collection -- William, can you ? ____________________________________________________________ Compete with the big boys. Click here to find products to benefit your business. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/Ioyw6ijmSpShhFaE4NQyteSob8iRnj GhQS8Qks90at396ekmGU30mY/
