Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 18:48:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Avant-Garde ???


>> Here we have two different models of the Vanguard --  one as permanent
>> opposition (nihlist) and the other as the shock troops of the humanist
>> social revolution ( the avant garde).  Both in the long run serve the same
>> function -- that is both are labortories for the intergration of new forms
>> and ideas and the dismantling of older no longer effective ones.  The
>> difference is the permanent opposition fulfills its task in a reactive
>> manner and the later is premised on an idealised vision of human freedom
>> and creativity.  Personally I prefer the latter to the former only because
>> I tend to believe in re-evaluation rather than devaluation.
>
>Saul, these are such large sweeps of language: nihilism, humanist social
>revolution, the long run, idealism.  But art, as Ann says and as Heiko says
>(though not in these words) is specific; consequently its resistances --
>such as they are -- are also specific.  An object here, a performance there,
>some music elsewhere.  People thinking about something they've seen, touching
>something in front of them, dancing, talking.  This all falls through the
>sieve of these large verbal gestures; nothing gets caught.  Or does it?

M.
  You must forgive me but I'm presently writng about Riegl and he tends to
deal with the inversion of those concepts and structures that inform and
form the art -- that is that which gives it its volition --  as you know I
blelieve there is the art that the audience/ participant beholds, their is
the art that is the object/ subject of its history and then there is the
art  that is concept and institution (ideological) all three are at once
one in the same yet not identical-- for as you point out art is not
symetrical  or flat and therefore each of its facets are  worth exploring
for they are full of potential  well beyond the schema that comes with the
starters kit




     --- from list avant-garde-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---