N really P but on the historic sources of the authority of a vision. Link after quote.

[Ian Livingston]

>More prescient souls, however, sensed
>what Duchamp would eventually articulate so icily - if every choice is merely
>the artist's, why is one choice better than any other?

Because one choice of imagery, action, sensory observation, language,
etc. generally more successfully elicits the desired or some desirable
responses in an audience.

On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 7:07 AM, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:
> onn Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Dave Williams <daveuwilliams at yahoo.com> wrote:
> To point to the Real or Not Real is not the question.
>>
>>I will always be disgreeing with this.
>>As Josipovici sez below: "if every choice is merely the
>>artist's, why is one choice better than any other?"
>>
>>Shall I project a world is the phrase, not Shall I project my projections?
>>
>>Josipovici's new book [link at end] excoriates lame English writers, some of
>>whom---McEwan
>>this list has scored.....context here for why, if interested.
>>
> >From the book:
>>
>>
>>Thomas Mann understood all this; his wonderful novel Doctor Faustus is an
>>exploration of the paradoxes and depths of the modernist crisis, which, as the
>>title suggests, he locates firmly in the 16th century. Taking our cue from this,
>>
>>we could say that, for Homer, the Muses dictated both the content and the form
>>of what he had to say; for medieval artists such as the sculptors of the great
>>cathedrals, what was to be depicted was determined by the cathedral's clerics,
>>and the forms - the way the beard of Moses or the hand of Christ were to be
>>carved - was given by tradition. This gives medieval art, as both Pound and
>>Proust recognised, an innocence and freedom from ego that both writers felt went
>>
>>missing from European art in the ensuing centuries.
>>
>>By the 16th century, the consensus on which this was based had disappeared.
>>Though patrons went on giving specific commissions to artists and composers for
>
>>the next two centuries, artists were becoming increasingly conscious that, from
>
>>now on, they had to rely only on their imagination. Our culture, which is still
>
>>in thrall to the individualistic strain in the Renaissance and in Romanticism,
>>welcomed this as a splendid new freedom. More prescient souls, however, sensed
>>what Duchamp would eventually articulate so icily - if every choice is merely
>>the artist's, why is one choice better than any other?
>
>
> http://www.newstatesman.com/books/2010/09/writers-english-modernism
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
"liber enim librum aperit."