What's junk is to disparage one sort of art as a means to falsely elevate another. If one wants to praise an artist's naturalistic realism or landscape painting then it should be done in comparison with other works of the same genre. It's very specious, downright stupid, to make a claim for one sort of art by discrediting what does not have anything to do with it. Really, it's almost as bad as saying black person is inferior to a white person because the black person does not share the white person's ideals. I have no patience for stupid journalism. As for the Upper Peninsula, I am very familiar with all of it and agree that it's a beautiful area, I go there every year. The locale, any locale, of course, has nothing to do with validating aesthetic standards in art. wc
________________________________ From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sun, January 6, 2013 3:53:42 PM Subject: Re: "Too little is asked and too little is expected of artists, critics, and curators...." Junk which? The earnest John Arthur,worshipper of Estes etal or the unfortunate Richard Abraham who was driven to landscape painting by the beauties of Michigan's Upper Peninsula? Kate Sullivan -----Original Message----- From: William Conger <[email protected]> To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> Sent: Sun, Jan 6, 2013 9:57 am Subject: Re: "Too little is asked and too little is expected of artists, critics, and curators...." Junk. wc ________________________________ From: joseph berg <[email protected]> To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> Sent: Sun, January 6, 2013 2:53:29 AM Subject: "Too little is asked and too little is expected of artists, critics, and curators...." http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/blog/jcontursi/art-richard-abraham
