Viewing page 40 of 71

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

10

to a certain extent, even geometricizing. Anyone taking a photographic [[strikethrough]] or [[/strikethrough]] something is a different kind of geometricization of life.

UM; Don't you think that [[strikethrough]] there is a change that this may very much relate to the point [[/strikethrough]] visual art may eventually function in a different context altogether? In [[strikethrough]] other words, that it will be acceptable to anyone with... [[/strikethrough]]

LL: Except that there's going to have to be a monstrously immense educational process to get people to even begin to look at things,.to say nothing of the looking|the way artists [[strikethrough]] the way artists [[/strikethrough]] look at things.

[[strikethrough]] UM: Oh yes, it's theoretical only. You know, I have talked to quite a few artists whom you know and I know, and I have noticed that the concern with what is art, the question that was so important a few years ago, is not so interesting anymore. No-one is too worried, what is art. But when you say to them, what do you think about anti-art, there's instantaneous reaction. Well, I would be very happy to tell you what I think about it. You know that our book is called Art=Anti-Art, with the "anti" surrounded by "art", with a dash sign. So [[/strikethrough]] I would like to know your opinion about this particular term.

LL; I'm not wild about it because it seems to me just another distinction, the way perform art itself is a distinction. It's just an imposition of someone else's [[strikethrough]] kind of esthetic [[/strikethrough]] idea of what something is or is not. [[strikethrough]] Although I'm certainly/concerned with it in the sense that [[/strikethrough]]... I guess I'm kind of ambivalent about it. 

[[Strikethrough]] UM: you see, Lucy, this is the difficulty. Whenever any term becomes known as such, people are very frightened of [[strikethrough]] of [[/strikethrough]] cliches. For