Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
Mark Alexander: deKooning dilemma
[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]Sandra L. Eckert
Tue, 30 Apr 1996 18:22:42 -0400
I haven't heard about Rudy, but I did read a "book?" called "Why
Cats Paint". What a kick!
I believe that art requires intention...I guess that means that if
you believe that animals are sentient beings, they can create art.
Personally, I don't believe it. I know animals can think, but I think that
their thoughts are less time-oriented than ours, and time is a given in
works of art, whether we are reflecting on the past or living in the moment.
Art lives in time; we are creatures that are very aware of time. Even a
work of art by an altzheimers patient, if there is some cognition of time,
be it past, present or future, could be called art. The paint wiped from
deKooning's brush, on the other hand, is something different; although it
was created by a sentient being who exists in and with time, the INTENTION
wasn't there; it doesn't communicate, respond to, or sample the moment. It
is an artifact, certainly, but art requires both intention and cognition,
and hopefully some form of communication, either personal or public.
I've been thinking about this alot lately. I'm directing a one-act
play called "Candid" by Michael Scanlan that contains some interesting
statements about art, and has me thinking...