3 ms·

Way back when, in fine arts school, a wise university professor taught us a unique trick to reframe statements regarding art. The trick was to replace all inst

Way back when, in fine arts school, a wise university professor taught us a unique trick to reframe statements regarding art. The trick was to replace all instances of “art” with “language”. Let's try it... “The main points of the article, as I understand it, are that society shouldn't encourage the creation of new [language], because we already have more than enough good [language] to last anyone a lifetime, and because [language manipulators] are mostly motivated by social status anyway.” Interesting I would say. Not to pick on your statement, but rather to illustrate how ideological underpinnings frame our concepts. Art exists as nothing more (or less) than language, yet our ideological pressures force framing. It strikes me that if that is the premise of the article (I read a little more under the hood) then even then, the framing is questionable.

cotsuka 12y ago
Do we need more languages? I certainly enjoy being able to travel to most countries and be able to speak English as a relative standard across all.
- schoen 12y ago
  I think language was meant in the sense of 'text, utterances'. In that sense, your reply (and my reply to your reply) have created more language.
  - ploxiln 12y ago
    ok then, we probably didn't need that language either
cousin_it 12y ago
OK, I see. Do you have an argument that doesn't rely on conflating "art" with "language"?
- foolrush 12y ago
  It isn't conflation. At all. Art, as a breed of language, holds vernacular, symbology, cliche, and many other facets within a culture. This isn't exactly ground breaking nor novel, but something that requires an understanding to begin an engagement with. It is as difficult to discuss topics as with any subject, when the two participants are resting on entirely different foundations. Akin to discussing linear algebra without considering the audience. Best I can do is offer entry points and hope you might see value.
  - cousin_it 12y ago
    Deep down, I don't think our foundations are all that different. It's not like all techies are blind to the role of culture as a communication channel, they just tend to view it differently. The section on "Propaganda" in the article specifically addressed that. I encourage you again to spell out your disagreement in more detail.
  - foolrush 12y ago
    Example: "Some areas of artistic endeavour seem to try to prove that art is worthless and a joke; it’s a little hard to explain some areas of modern or post-modern art" This has the sniffing of someone that isn't willing to follow the tendrils of a work, and certainly doesn't show a willingness to invest effort to understanding. How silly would it look to say "Some areas of software development seem to [xxx]" and conclude that, because something is hard to explain (subjective / contextual) that it therefore (implied) lacks value? Much like the rest of language, pieces exist in an ecosystem, and the meaning that emerges tends to be occluded until one invests in comprehending the contexts. Postmodernism, for example, is a clear move away from Modernism. I cannot count the number of times that I have seen genuine conflation of "Modernism" with "modern", for example. To understand Postmodernism requires an understanding of what came before and what it may be taking issue with. Of course, to wrap all of this up and encapsulate it as mere aesthetics or art is to ignore the very thing that gives art and other variants of language life; that it exists as a holistic thing in relation to philosophy, contemporary culture, historical culture, science, music, literature, and the rest of that complex ball. "Deep down, I don't think our foundations are all that different." Which is exactly why I am responding and attempting (probably failing) to communicate. It's not an easy task, especially when we consider the general culture around Hacker News, but one that I believe is extremely valuable.

cotsuka 12y ago

Do we need more languages? I certainly enjoy being able to travel to most countries and be able to speak English as a relative standard across all.

schoen 12y ago
I think language was meant in the sense of 'text, utterances'. In that sense, your reply (and my reply to your reply) have created more language.
- ploxiln 12y ago
  ok then, we probably didn't need that language either

cousin_it 12y ago

OK, I see. Do you have an argument that doesn't rely on conflating "art" with "language"?

foolrush 12y ago
It isn't conflation. At all. Art, as a breed of language, holds vernacular, symbology, cliche, and many other facets within a culture. This isn't exactly ground breaking nor novel, but something that requires an understanding to begin an engagement with. It is as difficult to discuss topics as with any subject, when the two participants are resting on entirely different foundations. Akin to discussing linear algebra without considering the audience. Best I can do is offer entry points and hope you might see value.
- cousin_it 12y ago
  Deep down, I don't think our foundations are all that different. It's not like all techies are blind to the role of culture as a communication channel, they just tend to view it differently. The section on "Propaganda" in the article specifically addressed that. I encourage you again to spell out your disagreement in more detail.
- foolrush 12y ago
  Example: "Some areas of artistic endeavour seem to try to prove that art is worthless and a joke; it’s a little hard to explain some areas of modern or post-modern art" This has the sniffing of someone that isn't willing to follow the tendrils of a work, and certainly doesn't show a willingness to invest effort to understanding. How silly would it look to say "Some areas of software development seem to [xxx]" and conclude that, because something is hard to explain (subjective / contextual) that it therefore (implied) lacks value? Much like the rest of language, pieces exist in an ecosystem, and the meaning that emerges tends to be occluded until one invests in comprehending the contexts. Postmodernism, for example, is a clear move away from Modernism. I cannot count the number of times that I have seen genuine conflation of "Modernism" with "modern", for example. To understand Postmodernism requires an understanding of what came before and what it may be taking issue with. Of course, to wrap all of this up and encapsulate it as mere aesthetics or art is to ignore the very thing that gives art and other variants of language life; that it exists as a holistic thing in relation to philosophy, contemporary culture, historical culture, science, music, literature, and the rest of that complex ball. "Deep down, I don't think our foundations are all that different." Which is exactly why I am responding and attempting (probably failing) to communicate. It's not an easy task, especially when we consider the general culture around Hacker News, but one that I believe is extremely valuable.