Philip Poburka on wed 20 feb 02
Dear Tom,
You are certainly correct here.
And my contention, to elaborate further, would be: tho' they could not see
it 'then' as they may see it now, it is even moreso that they may not see it
'now' as they saw it then.
This as defferential to the effects it has had since 'then', how or that it
has contributed to the 'now' from which we would see it.
Not merely is the 'lighting' different, but different too is the landscape
which the lighting may be supposed to illuminate.
There was the landscape in which it were arrived, and the landscape whose
topography has adjusted to it's presence.
Like that...
More-or-less.
Phil
Las Vegas...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom's E-mail"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: As a tribute to Peter Voulkos...a request.
> Robert
> You wrote "While young people may understand his work and like it or not,
my
> contention is nobody can see it as it was seen 30 years ago. The lighting
is
> different."
>
> There is a corollary to that, while people may understand his work and
like
> it or not, my contention is nobody 30 years ago can see it as it is today.
> The lighting is different.
> Tom Sawyer
> tsawyer@cfl.rr.com
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
| |
|
