Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 01:08:44 GMT From: cornets-AT-2005.bart.nl (cornets de groot) Subject: "we", the artist and his art Malgosia: >> (Mutatis mutandis Malgosia, we're not interested in the artist, but in his work). >Is this "we" analogous to LC's "we", or is it meant to encompass all of humanity? Me, what I am interested in is art, which is to me a network of processes of production intertwined with other processes of production. I am not sure which horn of your dichotomy this would find a resting place on. No, it's not analogous to LC's "we", nor is it concordiae, let alone majestatis. It would be nice if it were analogous to Nietzsche's own "We, Hyperboreans..." - but then I'm not sure if I would be admitted in that circle. So I guess it indeed means humanity, the way I see it. I do not mean to speak for anyone else but myself. I guess a network involves a great many things - the art and the artist to begin with. I cannot make up from what you say which of the two you would emphasize. I should make it clear however that I don't believe in a criticism that only takes the work of art into account, as if the artist wouldn't matter - as if art was an autonomous phenonemon. I'm interested in the artist's personality, as it can be perceived in his style. However I don't care much about the artist's motives. In other words: I like Jung better than Freud. Rutger Cornets. --- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005