GRGR(30): You will want cause and effect.

[Mark Wright AIA]

Howdy

I agree Dave, I was setting my straw man up to do battle with Paul's
straw man...
I do think that there is something to my objection that "intention"
cannot be intrinsic to an artifact, although it is what distinguishes
the *act* of making art from the act of making a tool, say.  Unless one
adds text to the work, explaining that this hammer here is a work of
art...  This paradox is at the core of Duchamp's work, and lots since. 
Does that awareness make me into a post-modernist whether I will or no?
a modernist? what? and can one ever carry that awareness with one into
one's work without arousing the nausea of irony?
 
Mark

--- Dave Monroe <monroe at mpm.edu> wrote:
> Another quick one: no, "The" capital-B Baroque isn't postmodern avant
> la
> lettre, but the postmodern certainly partakes of something of the
> (lower
> case and/or capital) baroque.  Off the top of my head, see, for
> example,
> Omar Calabrese, neo-Baroque: A Sign of the Times, ans well as perhaps
> Christine Buci-Glucksman, Baroque Reason: The Aesthetics of Modernity
> ...
> 
> Mark Wright AIA wrote:
> 
> > --- Paul Mackin <pmackin at clark.net> wrote:
> > > Consider
> > > this: minimizing tension between inside and outside (having them
> > > appropriate to each other) isn't nearly as radical a way to
> undermine
> > >  the
> > > hierarchical binary opposition (nearly as postmodernist
> presumably)
> > > as
> > > deliberately generating conditions where the inside and outside
> of
> > > buildings are in conflict with each other, as you say the
> > > postmodernists
> > > might do. The former is happy harmony. (What reason has the
> outside
> > > to
> > > complain when they have things just as good as us here on the
> > > inside?) However the latter way--EMPHASIZING differences--is at
> least
> > > symbolically dissident.
> >
> > So: would a German Baroque architect (let's say Balthazar Neumann
> at
> > Vierzehnheiligen) in 1747 become postmodern when he undermines the
> > hierarchical binary opposition by deliberately generating a
> condition
> > where the conflict between inside and outside is emphasised? Or
> only if
> > his intention is to be symbolically dissident?  (Or do you mean
> > symbolically dissonant?)  Is intentionality the key? If so, then
> that
> > quality of an artifact that is "post-modern" must die with its
> creator,
> > or once the accompanying explanatory text gets lost or forgotten. 
> In
> > that case is the "post-modern" artifact distinguishable from a
> complex
> > pre-modern work of art in any meaningful way, or simply by virtue
> of
> > sequence?
> >
> > This is fun again.
> > Mark
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
> > http://im.yahoo.com/
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/