Показать сообщение отдельно
Старый 26.12.2013, 19:43 Язык оригинала: Русский       #22
Местный
 
Регистрация: 25.09.2013
Сообщений: 143
Спасибо: 16
Поблагодарили 98 раз(а) в 71 сообщениях
Репутация: 196
По умолчанию

In contrast to the brilliant comment Peter would call an article not popular scientific and pseudo-scientific . Science there as sulfur in the match . Number of English words written in Russian letters , annoying - why is that? For pseudoscientific ? Joseph , you have trouble with the Russian ?

Nevertheless, the overall impression of the film positive . Always interesting to see the personal experience and not verbiage local activists theorists.

I think Peter 's touched a nerve problem by formulating it as a " Plastic " consciousness of modern man , sliding on the surface of the cultural life and lack of time to look inside , it's " insensitivity of the soul" - the same factors that are not conducive to the acquisition of works of art , and it is precisely such a each canvas imprinted on it internal combustion " man the creator " , the food does not allow you to turn mankind into a kind of robot. "

Peter speaks of the works of art, while I think about Joseph izoproduktsii . And it is fundamentally different things.

Removed

Potential buyer confused he does not know what is good and what is bad, what is true and what is false . And until it is restored to the rights of the very concept of art, of any market it can be no question .



anik вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Эти 2 пользователя(ей) сказали Спасибо anik за это полезное сообщение:
K-Maler (27.12.2013), Peter (27.12.2013)