On Mon, 15 Nov 1999, Gerry Reinhart-Waller wrote:
> You present a very difficult question. How do we determine art? I
> guess if it were my decision I would let the folks at the Tate Gallery
> have the final say. If they see it as "art" then it must be called art.
>
> Gerry
>
As the late Pedro Armillas used to say "Defining Art is the province of
Arters. These include critics, gallery owners and others. The great
mistake of modenr days has been to allow artists to function as arters"
Matthew Hill ([log in to unmask])
>
> Cornelius Holtorf wrote:
>
> > I wonder who else has been to the Tate Gallery in London recently and
> > seen
> > Mark Dion's work 'Thames Dig' (26 October 1999 until 27 February 2000,
> >
> > entry free).
> > Basically, on show is a cupboard full of finds, nicely ordered by
> > size,
> > colour, material etc, which Dion and his team collected on the
> > foreshow of
> > the Thames at low tide, in the center of London. These finds were
> > cleaned
> > and classified in front of the Tate Gallery and are, as I said, now on
> >
> > display inside. There are also several 'treasure chests' with glas and
> >
> > pottery and metal and shells, as well as photographs of all the team
> > members.
> >
> > To see and read more, have a look at
> > www.tate.org.uk/home/news/09_0699.htm
> > www.tate.org.uk/future/bankside/dion/
> >
> > What do fellow archaeologists think of it? Is it art? Is it
> > archaeology? Do
> > we like it (why/why not)?
> >
> > Cornelius
> >
> > *****
> > Cornelius Holtorf
> > University of Cambridge, Department of Archaeology
> > Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3DZ, U.K.
>
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|