Mon absence

I want to apologize for a few things. First: I am tres desolee that I am unable to write something as incisive and interesting as what Z and Glass just wrote.

Second: I am now not able to make snarky comments about others not posting because I have been AWOL for a week an a half now. In my defense I am getting married and that combined with a number of other things that have been going down over the last week or so have caused me to lose momentum. It shall return, but it may take some time.

Part of the reason I didn't respond to Z's post is that it didn't pose any questions. He just happened to make a compelling arguement (which I am all for). I wanted to come up with a question like "If Art is the sheath then what is the scabbard?" or some nonsense. But what I will ask instead is: How broadly does one define "art"? Can art be sport? Can art be politics? It seems to me we define art too narrowly much of the time.

The question that came to me in reading Z's post is what the difference between "good" art and "bad" art is. I have had an occasional arguement with my sister about the mertis of art for art's sake. She is of the mind that the sheer act of creation is worthy in and of itself. To which I don't disagree, but does it mean I have to LOOK at it? or WATCH it? or LISTEN to it? This conversation was in regards to modern visual art but I think it applies more broadly.

Alright I gotta go, this was my 10 minutes of internet time, but I promise if this conversation gets rolling I'll get in on it. And if it doesn't then I will post something long on Monday.