tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6375527657532041125.post8864611128551403683..comments2007-10-03T13:13:03.853-05:00sam sanfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08058198442198031681sam@samsanford.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6375527657532041125.post-51364910490482771292007-10-03T13:13:00.000-05:002007-10-03T13:13:00.000-05:00I very much agree, Sam. I liked the pieces when I was skimming your post, but even before I read your commentary after seeing the <I>Consumption</I> title I frowned a little. I wonder if Duncan felt like the title would help make the piece more appropriate for the exhibit? They seem to make the same mistakes, at least.<BR/><BR/>Re: Authorial intention: I think it should be taken into account, but ultimately if the artist says his abstract piece is a literal examination of a lot of political and scientific themes, and it's really a big spiral, I'll probably (1) think less of the artist (2) ignore his or her intention. I kind of think that artists are in some ways no more qualified to judge their own work than any other slob.<BR/><BR/>Your perspective on abstract art sure seems to respect the audience and the art a great deal more than the Lind Gallery show does. I'd be interested to see your artistic interpretation of the current political situation, if only because I know you have the judgment to do it well.Christopher Zanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10140577919396816464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6375527657532041125.post-79648646668409184482007-09-28T17:41:00.000-05:002007-09-28T17:41:00.000-05:00Thanks, D.sam sanfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08058198442198031681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6375527657532041125.post-33015684296688462302007-09-26T23:24:00.000-05:002007-09-26T23:24:00.000-05:00Spot on...it's irrefutable.dhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08947296671616432955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6375527657532041125.post-59914212478776529522007-09-23T22:02:00.000-05:002007-09-23T22:02:00.000-05:00Yeah, I think it's a completely different thing. Eno's titles generally refer to some aspect of the sounds in the piece; they are like placeholders allowing us easily to know which song we're talking about. To me, titles like "Sky Saw" and "Sombre Reptiles" don't pigeonhole the works in the same way as Chris Duncan's "Oh Dear, The Never Ending Spiral of Human Consumption (Myself Included)." Eno might have titled that piece something like "Never-ending Spiral." Also, the titles of Duncan's works become far more annoying when taken together with the exhibition statement. It's more like if Eno had named the song "The Sombre Reptiles of Late-Capitalist Oedipal Fetishism," then included an essay in the album notes claiming that the (instrumental) music constituted "a concise indictment of the brutality of technology's tyranny over the spirit" or something.sam sanfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08058198442198031681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6375527657532041125.post-1169445792829923912007-09-23T14:33:00.000-05:002007-09-23T14:33:00.000-05:00What about Brian Eno's song titles for his ambient pieces? <BR/><BR/>Is it alright to name an abstract piece, as long as avoids the topical?S>W>A>K>http://www.blogger.com/profile/00462569341756200877noreply@blogger.com