Some of the things Kyle said and quoted seem relevant to an earlier HN discussion [1] titled I don't "get" art """ The Book of Tea[2]... requires a mutual und

Some of the things Kyle said and quoted seem relevant to an earlier HN discussion [1] titled I don't "get" art """ The Book of Tea[2]... requires a mutual understanding between the artist and the spectator: > The sympathetic communion of minds necessary for art appreciation must be based on mutual concession. The spectator must cultivate the proper attitude for receiving the message, as the artist must know how to impart it. And the success of “People Staring at Computers” is based on condemnation rather than mutual concession. In a way, inviting condemnation can be the most effective way of imparting a message. I think Duchamp understood the possibilities of condemnation as an alternative to mutual concession. He addresses this in his short essay, “The Creative Act“ [3]. He says once an artist gives their work to the spectator, it’s up to the spectator to make a decision about that work. """ Had this article come out at the same time, I think that discussion would have gone better. [1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4124275 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4124275 [2] http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/tea.htm http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/tea.htm [3] http://www.iaaa.nl/cursusAA&AI/duchamp.html http://www.iaaa.nl/cursusAA&AI/duchamp.html