COMMENT NUMBER: 24
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 23:21:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Scott Brodie 
rodies@rosnet.strose.edu
To: galligan@sprynet.com

Subject: Re: que necissicito?

        Composers, writers, physicists, philosophers, and  artists work within specialized fields, and it is within those  fields that their work is, now, and again later, judged. A lot  of things made by so-called (self-called) artists simply don't  rise to the challenge. Some things are deemed to be art, not  because a so-called artist made them, but because the work  has merit as considered by other artists, art critics, and art  historians (despite the fact that once an artist has made a  reputation their work is sometimes more quickly, and with a less critical eye, considered of merit). Call me a philistine or  an ostrich, if you like, but I will beg out of the democratization of art that you suggest, and continue to believe in a few people with really unruly brains.  It's obvious that art is not determined by subject matter,  whether it be a stupid apple on a table or an egregious fuck scene. Its equally obvious that an apple is not art and neither  is pornography.                 

Pornography needs the money shot, but art has balls.


Copyright 1999
Jan Galligan Jan Galligan c/o Sprynet
All Rights Reserved
Last modified Dec 7, 1999