Conger wrote:What I can't stand are the inane remarks about art that
are based in stupid,
infantile notions of naming as meaning.

That sounds very Cheerskepian.
Kate Sullivan


-----Original Message-----
From: William Conger <[email protected]>
To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Wed, Oct 10, 2012 10:21 am
Subject: Re: "It is a widely accepted notion among painters that it
does not matter what one paints as long as it is well painted. This is
the essence of academicism. There is no such thing as good painting
about nothing."

All good paintings are 'about nothing' because they can't be 'about'.
Only
perceivers have 'aboutness' or meanings or concepts and these are
projected to
the artworks where they seem, note seem, to be reflected back to him or
her.

The first sentence  from Rothko is OK as long as the reader understands
basic
artspeak.  Every artist has said the same in different ways. It simply
says that
one must do whatever one does very well. Interpret that any way you
choose and
it comes out that real force and painterly quality (in this example
from Rothko)
impells one to give it meaning. If the work seems 'to lack meaning'
then the
lack is in the perceiver.  Again, Conger's law holds: Bring a little
cup, get a
little drink; bring a big cup, get a big drink.  The drink is your own
imagination refreshing you in the presence of art.

What I can't stand are the inane remarks about art that are based in
stupid,
infantile notions of naming as meaning.

wc


----- Original Message ----
From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wed, October 10, 2012 9:07:03 AM
Subject: Re: "It is a widely accepted notion among painters that it
does  not
matter what one paints as long as it is well painted. This is the
essence of
academicism. There is no such thing as good painting about  nothing."

Joseph quotes Rothko:

"It is a widely accepted notion among painters that it does not matter
what
one paints as long as it is well painted. This is the essence of
academicism. There is no such thing as good painting about nothing."

1) That sounds like two or three different statements, all of them
either
vacuous or false.

2) To the extent there's any validity to the first sentence, it
highlights
a difference between genres.

Reply via email to