2007/08/10
theory critique of common sense in historical perspective
As put in Jonathan Culler's short introduction to literary theory, theory, is a critique of common sense, of concept taken as nature.
I was told few days ago, that I was granted the scholarship for PS HK Jockey Club Curatorial Training Programme. And Tobias is already supplying different readings for us to read. One of them is an apex publication, with Boris Groys in it as well. As the German quotation last time dampened the idea of making "new" art as a ban/taboo for not doing sometime old, he did his trick again in this article on curating. He says that, in the present, only the artists have the power to name things as art, curator has not. But in the past, it was exactly the curator of the museum that has the power to made such decision. Reading Groys and you will definitely encounter, if not enjoy, lots of such (dialectical?) insights. But should I then categorize him as an art historian or an art theorist?
I was told few days ago, that I was granted the scholarship for PS HK Jockey Club Curatorial Training Programme. And Tobias is already supplying different readings for us to read. One of them is an apex publication, with Boris Groys in it as well. As the German quotation last time dampened the idea of making "new" art as a ban/taboo for not doing sometime old, he did his trick again in this article on curating. He says that, in the present, only the artists have the power to name things as art, curator has not. But in the past, it was exactly the curator of the museum that has the power to made such decision. Reading Groys and you will definitely encounter, if not enjoy, lots of such (dialectical?) insights. But should I then categorize him as an art historian or an art theorist?
