Mikhail Shemyakin: on modern art

[Mona]

Сообщение от LCR

Maybe I got it wrong, all this was quite a long time. Philosophy he still engaged in earnest. For me, it does not matter, but I apologize and retract it.

Groys philosophical education has not received NEVER. He is in philosophy about the same as Vysotskaya in cooking (which she has no education), ie in any case to reach the heights is enough talent, but not the diploma index. About Groys

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%93%...BE%D0%B9%D1%81

You forget one thing, and this thing is - the most important. Within five years, students in this narrative secular discipline daily show things and teach them to recognize and respect.

I do not forget the important things, but VY_TO THEM JUST DO NOT KNOW, that have no idea. What is important is not to respect the artist and to distinguish, telling stories about him without the slightest notion of the Arts! And it can not be without a system view, without understanding the integrity of the process as the unity of the ongoing time continuously since the Paleolithic period and still. And all this time the subject of art is the same: there is no progress in art (Zizek, quote tomorrow). If you do not distinguish art from blundering, if you do not distinguish between the art styles, current trends and their relationship logic and art, the illustrations you distinguish Rivera From Ribera, when you modernism from modernism not distinguish between?? and confused? many times had to face it with art. I think the Baroque artist Caravaggio - open any site - a train like you there has been written. I do not want to know anything and do not read anything. Interestingly I'd known, from chegorastut your knowledge? вобще in the textbook written that the art history of its conceptual and categorical apparatus has, and uses elaborated estetikoy.No you do not want her to know and do not recognize. What else can I say after that?