RE: [-empyre-] Re: Method Manifesto
At 1134 20020924, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> It seems to me that the status of an object as a work
> of art in any meaningful sense is dependent on more than the will of an
> individual. After all, Duchamp's readymades were not immediately accepted as
> art just because he said they were art. It took some time for his ideas to
> become institutionalised. The idea that an individual can determine what is art
> seems reactionary to me, since it constitutes an extravagant claim for dominion
> over both social and subjective conditions of reception, reflecting a somewhat
> authoritarian view that disingenuously obscures the power structures that
> support it.
I agree this argument is about reactionary authoritarian view.
But I do not think to be an authoritarian is always disingenuous.
I am thinking about the power which appreciate readymade as art.
This power is deeply linked to authority, I suppose.
In this meanings, I used the word "authority" in the Methodicism Manifesto.
BTW I think Kosouth's earlier works are more important than his later ones.
I bought his book "Art After Philosophy And After" several years ago, but
have not yet read whole through...
Those who want to subscribe for the email bulletin "Method,"
free bimonthly, contact me at email@example.com
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and