Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 20:31:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: Matthew King <making-AT-yorku.ca>
Subject: Re: r3: art/capital


> Who can say whether a piece of art may be revolutionary or not?

There is something off about the whole question, isn't there?  As Foucault
says, nothing is revolutionary or reactionary, repressive or liberatory,
in and of itself--it depends on the context.  In D&Gish language, it
depends on what machinic connections are available to be made with it.
Someone mentioned Wagner as an example of a state artist--well, yes, he
was Hitler's darling and so on, but I defy anyone to listen to the
Tannhauser overture and tell me there's nothing liberating, nothing
capable of dissolving you to your very molecules, in that.

Bravo, btw, to John Young, for a post that was, whatever else it was, very
amusing :).

Matthew

 ---Matthew A. King---Department of Philosophy---York University, Toronto---
                         dear readers, my apologies.
                      I'm drifting in and out of sleep.
 ---------------------------------(R.E.M.)----------------------------------