Well, where
ART-lover gone to! There's one conversation that our philosophical pretensions only he can with feeling, with properly, and slowly spread out on shelves!
See how interesting it turns out, only in terms of art-illiterate. But the freedom of art illiterate thought no one has canceled
.
What is the relationship of mind and feelings in the perception of works of art?
Gans rightly speaks of harmony, of a reasonable proportion. But how over time this ratio has changed, and changed it? (During the question for the end of the day
, in a fresh mind is not coming).
Classical art - all well-known and simple plot, ie even implying an explanation. That is an appeal to the mind exists, but, if I may say so, the subconscious.
Later - an appeal to the sense, as an explanation, if not harm, in any case, is not required.
Socialist realism - an appeal not know what. For photographic memory or something.
Modern art in the first place drawn to the mind, a sense may or may not arise depending on how the mind wants.
From my confused calculations it turns out that over time the ratio of the mind /feeling in the birth of art was not constant, varied, and with large amplitude. Who thinks that?