Comments on: Art’s Morality (A Reading of William H. Gass’s “The Artist and Society”)

By: A Guide to My Writing Here at Big Other « BIG OTHER

A Guide to My Writing Here at Big Other « BIG OTHER — Mon, 09 May 2011 14:08:52 +0000

[...] Art’s Morality (A Reading of William H. Gass’s “The Artist and Society”) — a look at how a noted formalist defines the concept [...]

By: A D Jameson

A D Jameson — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0000

I added the subtitle.

By: More on Inception: Shot Economy and 1 + 1 = 1 « BIG OTHER

More on Inception: Shot Economy and 1 + 1 = 1 « BIG OTHER — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 19:53:24 +0000

[...] Theory of Prose), which I am forever quoting from, and which I’ve written about here, here, here, and here. Shklovsky’s basic argument is that everyday life inures us to experiencing life: [...]

By: Dogtooth « BIG OTHER

Dogtooth « BIG OTHER — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 02:10:35 +0000

[...] 11. Those who enjoy interpreting art metaphorically will find much to mine here (see, for instance, the last line of Ebert’s review). That said, the film, refreshingly, doesn’t insist on any particular interpretation. It simply presents itself. This is correct; it’s very complete in itself. [...]

By: Tiny Shocks Revisited « BIG OTHER

Tiny Shocks Revisited « BIG OTHER — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 03:08:31 +0000

[...] or estrangement or defamiliarization). Again, see my original post for more on this; see also here, here, and here. Wood reduces this very powerful concept to personification, which I find extremely [...]

By: Innovation in Art « BIG OTHER

Innovation in Art « BIG OTHER — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 02:11:24 +0000

[...] innovation in art? This is something I’ve circled in my other posts, namely here, here, and here. Now I’ll try addressing it a little more [...]

By: Some Thoughts on “Vagabond” « BIG OTHER

Some Thoughts on “Vagabond” « BIG OTHER — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:33:13 +0000

[...] her most sympathetic. She has no tolerance for the falsities by which society regularly operates. (See William Gass for more on this. Or Holden [...]

By: A D Jameson

A D Jameson — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 16:53:25 +0000

Thanks, Marshal! This raises an excellent point: everything artificial is designed by someone. And even if that artist wasn’t an artist…well, maybe they were? (Maybe they weren’t just what Society would call an Artist.) But regardless, we can still approach anything that’s designed from a critical perspective.

But we often forget to. We just hope that it works. For the time being. So we can focus on other things.

(I’m not looking at my keyboard as I type this; it’s only an instrument.)

By: The Marshal

The Marshal — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 14:29:22 +0000

To answer your friend’s question, the parking lot and grounds of Dia:Beacon were designed by California artist Robert Irwin.

By: Andrei

Andrei — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:31:26 +0000

AD–I was actually wrong, it was not from “The School of Giorgione” (which is one chapter of “The Renaissance”), but from the conclusion to “The Renaissance”–the same section Greg was quoting. I read the conclusion right after the Giorgione chapter, so I guess they melded together in my mind.

Anyway, here it is. I don’t think Novalis really drew that much of a distinction between “philosophizing” and making art; most of his writing, actually, is both–and that’s true of Pater too.