An intellectual is a man who takes more words than necessary to tell more than he knows.
– Dwight D. Eisenhower

Evening sunlight

In the glazed state which follows ploughing through 50 pages worth of art theory on such topics as “What is art?” and “Art and intentionality”, I can’t help sometimes but agree with this statement by Eisenhower. I struggle between enjoyment of the challenge of university study, and the interesting topics it provokes, and my generally more pragmatic approach to life which keeps making me think, if it really is that complicated, circular and has no answer, why worry about it?

Perhaps I will leave our current ‘post-duchampian artistic environment’ to the intellectuals, and instead bring to your attention a comment left on this blog by my dad after I sent him this rather baffling over-academic sentence to chuckle at:

“…such antinominalists expect the categorization of an object into a class or type to be justified through reference to the object’s attributes and thus not an arbitrary matter. That is enough to license some to dismiss the institutional theory at its start, arguing, as a reductio ad absurdum, that any aesthetic theory that produces such a result disqualifies itself.”
– Hagberg, G., β€˜The Institutional Theory of Art: Theory and Anti-Theory’, in A Companion to Art Theory.

All I had to say on the matter was that it seemed very absurdum to me. Now, every time I read such a ridiculous extract – which is often – I will think of this wonderfully inventive, hilarious and nonsensical response, applied to the ‘histrionics’ of my blogging…

“…it’s very interesting how you linked in the aesthetics of cookery with the conceptual account of histrionics in post-modernism; the juxtaposition of errors in the preparation of ‘muffins’ holds sway in pre-totellian and more importantly totemic applications of the systemics of previous metacommentaries. It is also impressive how the ‘5 egg yolks’ were bound into the outer helix of a remaindered usage and thus supplied the chthonics of the subsequent culinary arguments. We look forward to further developments ‘with relish’.(Excuse the pun!)
– Chris Fothergill

Share this: