I was confused. I didn't understand your usage of "generative". At
first, I took it to mean some sort of sub-type of art historian. Now I
see you meant it as someone who created content that generated more
content by others.
Thinking in types, and sub-types does tend to colour my approach. I'll
be glad when I can stop thinking like that.
Roger
On 4/14/07, Barry Alpert <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Roger,
>
> I'm not sure if I get your particular usage "a.n.other historian", but the
> two figures I cite, Moira Roth & Annette Michelson, incited a considerable
> amount of creative, critical, and historical work by others (including my
> own) which got its start from their initial contributions. I was going to
> mention Rosalind Krauss as well, but then my directive experience of her
> entered in and I realized that she was probably less generative (in a
> measurable way).
>
> Barry
>
> On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 20:37:45 +0100, Roger Day <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > What's the difference between a "generative art historian" and
> >a.n.other historian?
>
--
My Stuff: http://www.badstep.net/
"Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious." Oscar Wilde
|