Max Herman wrote:

>
> Hi Eric,
>
> I wonder if one can utilize Judd in a decent way to articulate or
> formulate
> a new aethetic-evolutionary period called Networkism? He may be able
> to
> offer a "down to basics" attitude to counteract the negatives or
> false
> overcomings of the dilemmas, complexities, and challenges of the
> aesthetic
> evolution under network development. He relates to zen, boredom, and
> "radical depersonalization" as I believe Hilton Kramer said of him
> negatively. Maybe my not-automatically-included-in-regular-orders
> DVDbox
> relates as a "specific object"
> http://www.geocities.com/genius-2000/DVDbox.jpg, or at least to
> Judd's
> thematic of boxes? Then maybe Beuys' too with multiples and objects
> just
> set out there, or in vitrines and boxes.
>
> Beuys might have been intentionally or at least consciously using a
> two-sided approach to the "everyone is an artist" idea. That is, the
> goal
> is to increase people's abilities as creators not to flatter them.
> Which
> relates to the Gere article if not to what he actually said, the
> article-writer said it. Does anyone discuss how Judd may compare to
> Beuys?
> I think that for people to learn about Judd's depersonalized approach
> could
> help reduce what Niebuhr called "collective egoism."
>
> Beuys also didn't like U.S. chauvinism, so maybe he and Judd hated
> each
> other for an exciting rivalry like Fischer and Spassky.
>
> In any event, whatever artists do from this second forward would have
> to use
> or could use the ideas and work and language provided by earlier
> artists
> without being enslaved to them, I'm convinced.
>
> So, do you agree it's OK and creatively destructive to keep Judd
> around as a
> positive factor?
>
> Pound's poem states
>
> PACT
>
> I make a pact with you, Walt Whitman-
> I have detested you long enough.
> I come to you as a grown child
> Who has had a pig-headed father;
> I am old enough now to make friends.
> It was you that broke the new wood,
> Now is a time for carving.
> We have one sap and one root-
> Let there be commerce between us.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Max Herman
> The Genius 2000 Network
> Submissions OK through 9/15
> www.geocities.com/genius-2000
>
>
> +++
>
>
Hi Max,
I think we can use just about anything for creative destruction.
What I meant in my inflammatory remark was that Judd had made art even more commodifiable without meaning to. By giving academics access to the tools of systems analysis, *rigorous criticism* which was difficult to build upon gained the upper hand on intuitive, subjective discourse.
I was rereading Art and Language's Portrait of Lenin during the summer, and their style of writing reminded me of something I couldn't put my finger on. It then came to me, after a decade of programming I had been exposed me to a good deal of Business Analysis and Business Requirements. It was the same language, just different nouns.
Weird? yep, but maybe its just me,
Eric