Good Morning,
        I'm probably going to get flamed good for this but you've stepped on a
pet peeve.
        Modern and contemporary were not classifications until we had to many
Ph.D.s' with the need to have something to say.
        Artists have always copied what went before them or went off in some
new direction. When that new direction worked it survived and we had a
new modern development.
        We do not find commentary breaking down segments of the past by name,
save for the past and the present until our own times.
        I understand academia's need to validate it's self, and the current
desire to pigeon hole knowledge.
        The effect of this pigeon holing is to put walls between people. In
that it becomes impolite to cross into someone else's aria of expertise,
with out the proper papers upon the wall.
        It is often taken by those with papers that those who are with out
papers can not have any understanding of the subject.
        This is not to say that we have not reached a point in history where
giving eras of development or predominate style some title, e.g. Art
nouveau, is not useful. But any such effort should be a help not a
hindrance.
        For after all, is not all this effort for the enlighting of every one?
        I will go and hide in my bomb shelter now.
                        Sincerely yours
                                Tw

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).