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.
[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]marcia m eaton
Thu, 4 Mar 1999 04:16:40 -0500
Received: from imo24.mx.aol.com (imo24.mx.aol.com [188.8.131.52])
by hil-img-8.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) with ESMTP id
for <marciameaton>; Wed, 3 Mar 1999 23:44:48 -0500
Received: from DRLanders
by imo24.mx.aol.com (IMOv19.3) id fBEWa10434
for <marciameaton>; Wed, 3 Mar 1999 23:20:43 +1900
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 23:20:43 EST
Subject: Re: meaning/intention
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 84
I know that I knowing more about the body of work does help one to
the meaning the artist was trying to convey. When we understand the time
period or the social conditions of the artists time what we see may take on
whole different meaning than when we just see it in a gallery
It may not make the subject better, but it may help us to appreciate it
in what the artist was trying to convey.
I would go even farther: I think that sometimes (e.g. with art from a
different culture) we "misperceive" if we don't have adequate information.
I think there is a very real sense in which we may have a moral obligation
to members of a culture or to individual artists to discover more about the
work that we can simply get just from looking at it. Would you go this
Reply: Debi13: "Re: Re: meaning/intention"