Date: Mon, 07 Jul 1997 19:37:15 -0700
From: will <pamwil-AT-wco.com>
Subject: re:bad choices


yup...
but, then, citicorp reps like dennison can apparently, in all mauvais foi,
assert-
  "Wealth and poverty are, in some sense, arbitrary concepts laid down by
remote categorizational processes; i.e beauty/wealth/poverty/ is in the eye
of the beholder, that is, in some sense.
   Or something like that..."
perhaps this should be seen as a post-modern mission statement.
just read dore ashton's book about rothko- and, what can i type? at the
risk of being unacademic, i can only paraphrase- i did not take notes.
at some point rothko said that a painter is not self-expressive but talks
about the world. given his work, this has not been easily recognised. there
is no small problem about expressivity and context. and irony. many would
assert that 'The New American Painting', as it toured in europe was a
propagandistic nationalism writ large to cement another part of post-war
american hegemony. but, then, there's rothko.
and, what is to me art.
social inequities often almost consume me but i am looking at myself now
and wondering if 'the aesthetic' isn't actually first of all adequate
presentation- there is something like the knowledge that substantive
societies are able to sleep with- a
cognition of struggle that might no longer reproduce 
stressed inadequacy but bring us somewhere...
assuredly, this is no new age and i would suggest that artists should be
the first to know...



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