| Author: |
|
Art & Language |
|
|
| Posted: |
08.06.2001; 18:11:22 |
| Topic: |
MYTH |
| Msg #: |
245 (top msg in thread) |
| Enclosure: |
|
| Prev/Next: |
244/246 |
| Reads: |
23168 |
245 MYTH A philosophized art might be assumed by anthropologists to be merely a part of the old art myth --but if we make a distinction (i.e., are responsible for it) do they really have the option to overlook it (we compel them to take notice)? -> Anthropology 22, 23, 25; Art 31, 33; Art & Language 49; Art community 37; Historical reconstruction 161; Proceeding 291; Work 387; & Art 29; Art, anthropologized 35; Art, work of 54; Autonomy 62; Falsification 131; Ideology 170; Opportunism 246; Opportunist A & L 251; Responsibility 311, 313; < 244 | 245 | 246 >
|
