RE: RARA-AVIS: Street 8

From: Words from the Monastery (
Date: 19 Apr 2000

And of those "masterpieces" have a large group saying they are not just one person ... they also have a large body of "experts" in their respective areas saying they're masterpieces. As far as public acclaim goes ... the public know its a master piece ... it's accepted by the public as a masterpiece. It's not nonsense. Joe blow doesn't just decide that something's a masterpiece because they think it is. What the work was met with initially is irrelevant ... it's the history of the work that matters. Besides in the past "the public" wasn't the general population ... for one, they couldn't read and for two, they rarely had access to the works. Only in our time has there been such a wide public access to the arts.

volente Deo,

Anthony Dauer Alexandria, Virginia

"I know. We are ... the lucky ones." Bif Naked, 1999

> From: pabergin
> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 8:51 PM
> By whose definition?
> Consider -- Guernica. Michaelangelo's "Moses." Taliesan (sp?) West. The
> Curved Arc. Cadillac Ranch. Candy. Pinktoes. Naked Lunch. Ulysses.
> Finnegan's Wake. The Ginger Man. Portrait of the Artist as a
> Young Dog. The
> Ballad of Reading Gaol. Jude the Obscure. Moll Flanders. Madame Bovary.
> One could go on. All of the above, acknowledged masterpieces all, were met
> either with indifference, hostility, or an active move to suppress.
> What's this public acclaim nonsense?

# To unsubscribe, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to
# The web pages for the list are at .

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 19 Apr 2000 EDT