Цитата:
Сообщение от Cyril Syzransky
And I do think that the word "art" is very common. As a "doctor", for example. For use in the home suit ( "But he who works?" - "Yes, he was a physician."), And for the particular case requires clarification (surgery, traumatology, psychiatrist, venereologist  ).
Man in the topic is clear that a certificate of the concrete period of creativity, Mr. N should apply to such a man, but for the article about the exhibition-to syakomu.
eva777, "art historian"? Not really understand what it is. He makes something? |
It only seems. Critics-men of science, and science is the exact thing. They specialize in specific sections, At least to write a dissertation. They must know when ktoto chtoto done so judged on what has been done and the judge about his contemporaries in terms of their knowledge. So it was with the Impressionists and all the avant-garde, but "the vanguard of the 1960's, which is a political rather than artistic performensom, and was just blown art critic. The point here is rather watered orientation than in the arts.