Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rambi who wrote (80864)	6/6/2000 10:14:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

That is just the question: why does it exist? I have suggested a stereoscopic vision of the thing: on one level, it exists to entertain or move people, and they can do pretty much what they want. I genuinely believe that, and don't generally go out of my way to rain on anyone's parade..... On another level, it is a signal expression of human achievement, a heritage to be guarded, nurtured, treated with care. Now, who is going to do that? Those who have some devotion to it, or the casual user? In the nature of the case, it is left to those who are devoted. I hope it is no insult to say that life is short, resources are limited, space in museums is dear, and program space in theaters and concert halls is too, and therefore, yes, selections have to be made about what is important and what is not. Professionals, of course, make most of these decisions, and not always well. Their "public", the one that they principally hear from and interact with, is composed of people like me, who go to dozens of exhibits a year, and who are likeliest to contribute money, time, and, if especially affluent, actual works. I am not trying to arbitrate what is good and bad for the rest of you. I am trying to make sure that the best is favored institutionally and by collectors, and that the ranks of those seriously interested increase. Incidentally to that, I do, indeed, react to various things. I would not express myself if there were not some interest in discussing the issue, merely, or some chance of recruiting someone to a greater interest in the subject. I certainly said nothing untoward to my mother- in- law........ By the way, although I do think learning intellectually is useful, the primary emphasis of connoiseurship is on looking and listening, not reading. This seems to have been a misapprehension throughout this discussion. If a choice had to be made between learning some music theory, and listening to a lot of concert music, I would recommend the latter..........

To: Rambi who wrote (80864)	6/6/2000 10:54:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

A lot depends on whether or not one thinks that experience is valuable, and causes one to understand and perceive better, that one moves from relative blur to clarity and insight. If that is so, then looking at a lot of paintings, or listening to a lot of concert music, will improve one's taste, although, be it noted, taste is more contingent on incidental factors of history and personality than many things, and therefore there will always be room for disagreement. Still, mere exposure tends to produce greater convergence....... A lot also depends on what one thinks of democracy. If one thinks that people are qualified to opine on anything, and be taken seriously, regardless of whether they have knowledge or experience of the matter, then art can be put to a vote, majority rules. If you think that it is wise that decisions are delegated to persons and committees who have the expertise and put in the time to work through issues, and that the broad majority ought to merely determine the general trend of government, and review performance, then the idea that an elite has exceptional influence on matters of art is not particularly offensive....