Now that is surprizing.
It might be surprising to hear it from an elite theorist, but he's an exception to the rule! The way he rationalizes art fits perfectly with the rationale behind Spumco cartoons. I just wish more people understood that.
That's cool. I got in a heated discussion once with a bunch of people trashing Dutton. I think the ideas in the Art Instinct seems really interesting and plausible.It's fun to know he has pretty good taste in cartoons!
He has some good points. His Olympics comments are right on point. The robot playing the piano I think misses the point, however. Sure we're not impressed by a robot that plays the piano, but I think that it's inherently interesting to see a robot play sound in the best way suited for it. It can be just as interesting in its own way as a person playing. My take is that it's like comparing our perception of fish or reptiles to our perception of mammals. You might look at a skink or a gecko and be very interested in it, but relate more to how an aardvark feels.It may be true that art displayed at what he calls special occasions is universal, but there's usually some work of art somewhere else, a sculpture that cheers you up on the way to work or a painting you liked seeing while working in a friend's shed.For his idea of the artist behind the work, that doesn't fully hold up for me. There's works of art I like which show no artist's selection of any kind. Aesthetics, I believe, can be judged beyond the artist though not in the same way. The basics of shapes, colors, and forms are the same regardless of whether there's a person involved.I think his thoughts in general are interesting but I don't take everything he's saying at face value.
EZ- Thanks for sharing your story! were those people followers of Postmodernism?GW- Some interesting points there! Personally I see a robot playing a piano as a great accomplishment of engineering.
Post a Comment
5 comments:
Now that is surprizing.
It might be surprising to hear it from an elite theorist, but he's an exception to the rule! The way he rationalizes art fits perfectly with the rationale behind Spumco cartoons. I just wish more people understood that.
That's cool. I got in a heated discussion once with a bunch of people trashing Dutton. I think the ideas in the Art Instinct seems really interesting and plausible.
It's fun to know he has pretty good taste in cartoons!
He has some good points. His Olympics comments are right on point. The robot playing the piano I think misses the point, however. Sure we're not impressed by a robot that plays the piano, but I think that it's inherently interesting to see a robot play sound in the best way suited for it. It can be just as interesting in its own way as a person playing. My take is that it's like comparing our perception of fish or reptiles to our perception of mammals. You might look at a skink or a gecko and be very interested in it, but relate more to how an aardvark feels.
It may be true that art displayed at what he calls special occasions is universal, but there's usually some work of art somewhere else, a sculpture that cheers you up on the way to work or a painting you liked seeing while working in a friend's shed.
For his idea of the artist behind the work, that doesn't fully hold up for me. There's works of art I like which show no artist's selection of any kind. Aesthetics, I believe, can be judged beyond the artist though not in the same way. The basics of shapes, colors, and forms are the same regardless of whether there's a person involved.
I think his thoughts in general are interesting but I don't take everything he's saying at face value.
EZ- Thanks for sharing your story! were those people followers of Postmodernism?
GW- Some interesting points there! Personally I see a robot playing a piano as a great accomplishment of engineering.
Post a Comment