Discuss?

[Tyler Wilson]

Surely, there is much to argue with in the muddle below, and I’m unlikely to defend it, but the way I see it:
 
Art is art. It won’t be pigeon-holed or covered with blanket-statements. Wouldn’t be Art if it could be. And I have to wonder about anyone trying very hard to pin it down. The thing is, each individual person who sees, reads, experiences a creation makes the subjective call as to whether it is art (as opposed to a picture, a story, sound, etc.) and it does not exist as such until that determination is made in the mind of the “experiencer”. “Artists” create things, express things in each her/his own personal way and I would hope do not consider (or label, maybe) those creations as “art”. That is left to others. In the same way, those experiencing something decide whether it is political, according to their own lights (and how maybe it will be used or thought of going forward). There is often a lot of overlap in things judged to be art and things judged to be political, but no direct equation to my mind. It’s very true, and often the case, a creator/”artist” may create a thing with political intentions, but again, that doesn’t make it art.
--
T
 
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130206/a9f9ab36/attachment.html>