At 06:49 PM 12/12/96 +0500, kocanda wrote:

(in reference to grafitti)
<snip>

>this all leads me to ask why we need to bring "art" into the discussion.
>most cultures that i've studied (other than we in the west) tend not to
>even have a category called "art."  as you hint at above, it is fair to
>question a purely western interperatation of "other" art.  but i have to
>ask why even bother calling it art?  that only forces us to fit it into
>(one of) our categories of art...

<snip>

Point well taken.  Yet, since the grafitti we are dicussing occurs in a
western country, then it does not seem wholly inappropriate to me that we
apply to it the prevailing of that culture.

BTW, you made an excellent point on your other posting.  We must *never*
confuse art with democracy.  Democracy is a wonderful idea in politics, but
it has no place in art, science, athletics, fashion, cooking, and many other
hjuman endeavors.

-- Gene

Eugene W. Dillenburg
Coordinator, Special Projects
Exhibits Department
The Field Museum of Natural History
Chicago, Illinois  60605-2496
V: (312) 922-9410 x636
F: (312) 922-6973
E: [log in to unmask]

"Never pay more than minimum wage for a shirt."

                                -- Bruce Elliott