I love blabbing on this list but I'm ready to give it up because it's no fun anymore when the only posts are these forwarded quotes from Berg, all dealing with his unreflective views of the art market, as below. Truth is, the so-called "meaningless cycle of consumption" always existed, even though one is not so sure anyone can define it very precise,y. Also, the "collecting of treasured objects" has also always existed and many of those objects have no commercial value at all. Of course some do. The point is that there is no necessary link between meaningless consumption and collecting treasured objects. A freshman in beginning logic could see that. Again, Berg only quotes the most banal and shallow thinking to stand in for his own views. One would think he/she would have more self-respect.
There are many strands of the artspeak dialogue going on all the time. That is, there are theoretical definitions and justifications for almost every possible iteration of so-called art for now and in the past. Art is a product of the artspeak just as much as the artspeak is a product of art. It helps to know what particular strand of artspeak is relevant to any particular form of art it helps to define. It's not very useful to mix and match these dialogues as one may simply wish. Some art is indeed a product of a particular way of creating a purpose for it and one purpose is to identify a consumer market at a very high end. Its value as art is defined partly in terms of how well it fulfills that purpose. At the other end, the lowest end of consumer markets, there are many genres of art as well. They also help to identify the purpose of being art for that level. When Berg puts a little $1 Holiday button on his/her lapel, that's an art form. When the other Berg puts on a $20,000 watch, that's another art form. When the McBerg buys a 10 million dollar Jeff Koons, that's another art form. Any of those art forms can be traded, collected, sold. But none of that is necessarily identifying the aesthetic enjoyment or pain of each object. There is a context for any art and any artspeak or dialogue/theory. At this time, long after the primary discussions have concluded that there is no universal objective definition of art, it is truly pointless to be immersed in journalism that pretends otherwise -- out of willful ignorance -- just to ring the alarm bells that art is going to the dogs. wc ----- Original Message ---- From: joseph berg <[email protected]> To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, December 4, 2010 4:09:18 PM Subject: "The meaningless cycle of consumption was counterbalanced by the collection of treasured objects. But this cultural economy has become stagnant as art becomes increasingly insular and detached from everyday life. Consumption continues to accelerate w "The meaningless cycle of consumption was counterbalanced by the collection of treasured objects. But this cultural economy has become stagnant as art becomes increasingly insular and detached from everyday life. Consumption continues to accelerate while art risks being locked into the fashion cycle." http://kitezh.com/text/craft-unbound-introduction
