RE: [-empyre-] Re: Method Manifesto

[nakazawa@aloalo.co.jp (Hideki Nakazawa)]

At 1134 20020924, j.abbate@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au 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.
> 
> jsa

hi jsa,
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... 

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