RE: [-empyre-] Re: Method Manifesto



At 0027 20020924, Jim Andrews wrote:

> My feeling on the matter is that saying 'X is art' is a bit like saying 'This proposition is not
> provable' since one arrives at a contradiction should one say it is false; no contradiction
> seems to arise if one says it is true, yet neither then is it provably true. Nor is it an axiom
> completely independent of the rest of the language system, for if it were, its negation would be
> an acceptable alternative to the proposition itself, but it is not. It is an unprovable
> statement that nonetheless must be accepted as true. Each new piece of art is thus more like an
> axiom than a theorem.

Hi Jim,
My thinking is maybe close to the above arguemants.
That is one of the reason why I dare to publish "manifesto"
as a manifesto, not a theorem.
Yes, the manifesto includes unprovable axiom, I know.

This argument will be sure to come into contact with the 
problem of "art for art sake," and in this meaning, I 
consider Kosouth's art is close to "art for art sake,"
rather than "art for life sake," inspite of his own thinking.

Hideki

--
Hideki Nakazawa
nakazawa@aloalo.co.jp
http://aloalo.co.jp/nakazawa/
**
Those who want to subscribe for the email bulletin "Method," 
free bimonthly, contact me at nakazawa@aloalo.co.jp







This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.