I don’t think you can talk about ‘the uses you put art to’; I think art is not divisible from its uses. Perhaps that’s a step towards a definition of what art is?
Christ, how annoying. Materiality is coming through all over the place. Richard Barrett posting on his blog about how art is sensation (via Clay/Deleuze).
What do I think it wrong with materiality? Well, I think it’s a severing of a physical or literal art object (including texts) from their implications – denying that they might have any implications, even, which I don’t think are the same as results.
I think I worry about what this might mean for me regarding the creative seams I feel I haven’t fully exploited yet. Guess I’d better get on with it and keep listening. and remembering. The thing is, it can be quite hard to remember a whole world view from a different brainspace. Maybe (he thinks ludicrously) smells will help bring it back, if, for example I smell something and try to associate it with exactly how my views are at this very moment. Mind you, it’d have to be something I’d never smelt before. It’s back to materiality perhaps, anyway….