From: clay (wcharmon@wt.net)
Date: 03/11/02-07:32:03 AM Z
> I know it is an endless discussion to argue about Art and what is art and
> what isn't. But at the end it got to do about what the public likes and
> finally what are they willing to pay for it. From this perspective I have a
> question to ask you: If you have $100.000 and you must spend it on either a
> Limited Edition 2/5 "extravagance*" brush-out platinum print or a Limited
> Edition 2/5 computer print both made by Hiroshi Sugimoto, as an example:
> Which one would you buy?
>
>
>
Two cents worth
If you're on this list, you probably just like the ^feel^ of hand-made
prints, whether we can articulate exactly why or not. It may just be that we
as humans prefer to see the 'hand' and evidence of the artist as a fellow
human instead of mass produced perfection.
My spouse occasionally will pick up quilts for her informal 'collection'. I
know for a fact that she will not spend money on a machine stitched quilt,
no matter how interesting the pattern, and will only buy a hand-stitched
piece. I realize this is not a 'fine art' example, but may be relevant in
that it indicates the response we have as humans to the evidence of the
human 'touch' in the things with which we surround ourselves.
We may be chasing our tail here. Its a big tent, with room for all sorts of
approaches - and I'd guess that people are pretty much going to do what they
want anyway. How about less argument over artistic purity and more examples
of art for all of us to look and appreciate?
I'm headed to Fotofest, and I'm going to look at stuff without having a clue
as to how it was made. Is 'willful ignorance' bliss?
Cheers
clay
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/10/02-09:28:54 AM Z CST