File spoon-archives/avant-garde.archive/avant-garde_1995/avant-garde_May.95, message 45


Date: Mon, 29 May 1995 11:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: vance <vance-AT-CWU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Simon Ford's article




On Mon, 29 May 1995, Whit Blauvelt wrote:

> Manifesto production is cool; manifesto following is lame. The first is a
> creative act, an openning to possibility; the second is anal-retentive. At
> the time of manifesto production, things are generally proceding with vigor
> and worth; afterwards, in times of reiteration and formulaic following, it's
> time for the concensus to be shattered or more gently subverted, either by a
> new manifesto, or by new art in some other format. 
> 
> Manifesto is just another format for art. It's the relationship of the
> individual to the work which becomes problematic, when the manifesto is
> taken literally, or as if the best cooking could ever by done by recipe.

Whit, that's close to the way I perceive such things as manifesto writing 
or a futile attempt to defind "what is art." The importance of such 
attempts is to clarify in the mind of s/he who makes the attempt what 
they are focused on. I agree that those who follow such definitions are 
like the drunk who was searching for his keys (which he's lost a block 
and a half away) under street light because there was better light there.

But as I understand you view, this negates the idea of the avant-garde.

If there should be no followers, there can be no leaders, no a-g.

vance


     --- from list avant-garde-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005