Public art is intended to engage public response and/or participation. Fine. There are still many other forms of art that are not aimed at the public a such. There are many kinds of activity that are not validated by the public. My research physicist daughter would not expect the public to understand or judge her work. Why does the "public" assume it has the right to judge artists and their work if there is no intent to include them? Why should I as an artist who does not ordinarily make "public" art be expected to engage onlookers in a dialogue about "what art is and why it matters" ? Frankly I don't know what art "is" and don't know why or if it matters except in a particular personal moment for a particular subjective reason, both untransferable Why is it necessary to give a name to everything and then to give meanings and then to justify them? Most of what goes on around us every moment is unrecognized and has no meaning that we know of or use. wc
----- Original Message ---- From: joseph berg <[email protected]> To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, June 12, 2010 4:57:17 PM Subject: "Artists bear a responsibility to stop whining about no one understanding their work and to engage onlookers in a dialogue about what is art and why it matters." http://www.dailyfreeman.com/articles/2010/06/11/life/doc4c1183dfeb27a761773640.txt
