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.
D. Pierce's points
[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]EILEEN PRINCE
Fri, 7 Jun 1996 11:41:48 -0500 (CDT)
Dorothy Pierce raises a very important point in a recent posting. Henry
alluded to it in one of his responses as well. That is, the importance of
"familiarity" in our evaluation or liking of a work of art. I have
discussed this in a slightly different way in earlier messages also. This
is one of the reasons I feel that some form of DBAE is so important. Not
only must we have knowledge before we "judge" something, but frequently we
must have knowledge in order to "like" something. As I have stated before,
such knowledge can work both ways: it can refine our tastes and thus narrow
our ability to find pleasure in art (hence our tendency to reject paintings
on black velvet) or it can open new worlds for our enjoyment (such as my
aforementioned student's newfound love of Cubism.) Henry summed it up with
his wonderful play on words: "I don't know much about art, but I LIKE WHAT I
KNOW!" How true!
Also, I agree with Dorothy's point about patrons such as Gertrude Stein
supporting Picasso so that he might "do his own thing"; however, I would
again point out that that is a relatively recent example. It would be
fascinating to compare the motives and rationales of someone like Stein
with, say, the Medicis' support of Renaissance artists or Eleanor of
Aquitaine's patronage of Medieval poets and musicians. Does anybody know of
any books on such a theme?
Once again, I want to thank all the artsednet contributers for their
wonderful and insightful comments on this forum. It's like attending a
seminar every day, and I cannot begin to measure the positive affect you
have all had on my teaching! I look forward to the day we can all "do lunch".