Actually, Berg's comment is not so cliched.  It is a common sense view that is 
enshrined in our educational system.  It also imitates Friedrich Schiller's 
views on art and beauty. (see his Letters: On the Aesthetic Education of Man" 
1795).  Briefly, Schiller concluded that since all men contain within them the 
ideal perfect human man they only need to be educated by example to manifest 
that perfection.  Thus by becoming acquainted more and more with examples of 
the 
best artistic and moral expressions of ones culture, the better one is with 
respect to recognizing quality or beauty, etc. Of course Schiller felt that a 
society will naturally, eventually strive toward quality.  Even today, our 
educational system adheres to the view that if people are given enough exposure 
to quality (high taste) they will strive to comprehend it and thus becomes 
better citizens and better able to demand high quality.  Blame Schiller.

The trouble with Schiller's idea is that it presumes a non-ironic ideal for 
both 
art and people. Now, since the Duchamp-Warhol revolution at least, irony and 
bad 
taste have become the new ideal.  Low art IS high art. Bad taste IS good taste. 
 The commonplace IS the ideal.  Almost everyone is expecting this upside-down 
view to change any moment.  If there is such a thing as anxiety in art  (I 
include theory and all art practices) or an aesthetic crises, it is the 
apprehension, the hope, the expectation, the prophecies, of a restoration of 
the 
Ideal.  So far, no luck.  All we have are periodic redundancies and, yep, 
mediocrity all around.

The big difference between the notion of high quality as the best and 
mediocrity 
as the merely serviceable or good enough is that in many instances we know that 
the merely serviceable is indeed also the best quality.  What beats the 
Styrofoam cup for throw-away one-time use?  Nothing, unless you care about the 
environment and wasted oil.  But those were never part of the quality equation 
when it existed as seeking the best that can be made. Now, if a smart society 
does put the environment and natural resources as a top priority, some other 
good enough throw away container will need to be made.  How about paper?  Try 
it 
and go broke or build a pr mindset for the Ideal all over again.

I don't think we can easily escape Schiller's view (and thus Berg's), however 
cliched it is.  It comes down to quality being contingent upon taste and taste 
is an expression of values and values are an expression of ideals and ideals 
must be non-ironic in order to hold up. That means the end of the Duchampian 
universe.  I can hardly wait.

wc


----- Original Message ----
From: Michael Brady <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Mon, November 12, 2012 8:35:53 AM
Subject: Re: Error and quality

On Nov 12, 2012, at 9:32 AM, Michael Brady <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
> But Berg's remark is a clichi,

That last word is "cliche" and not a kind of nut, folks. I typed an e-acute
but the email system substituted an i.

Reply via email to