Fwd: Misc.

[David Morris]

BTW, I think Pop Art, undeniably still very much influential, has led to a
degradation of art.  It celebrates crass, and is based in cynicism. It is
also essentially meta-art: the value of the object is conceptual, not the
object's own qualities.

I know I sound a retro conservative, but I think I'm looking forward to
something better than what now is.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *David Morris*

P makes fun of Pop Art in V.  Pop Art may be a precursor of Post Modernism,
but their aesthetics are very dissimilar.

Also, Rauschenberg is not generally thought a Pop figure. He's more a
modernist collage master.

On Sunday, November 4, 2012, Markekohut wrote:

> I caught up with a recent Friday NYT, reading luxuriously all the new
> movie reviews, all the long art show pieces, etc.
>
> Lotsa good words on the Rauschenberg exhibit and other pop art from the
> time.Rauschenberg
> Drawing cartoon panels as his breakthrough around 1962ff. Warhol, others.
>
> And I asked myself to ask the plisters why P appearing around then,
> faulted by many for his cartoon characters isn't ' talked about much as
> part of the same Zeitgeist.
>
> Those artists gave us ourselves back as cartoons---and we think they were
> right
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20121104/7ed8227f/attachment.html>