Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
Sigh. As usual, you're intractable in your refusal to listen to what anyone else is saying. Let's review:
1. You posted an article that purports to diagnose a problem in how art is taught by reference to a shocking piece of performance art involving self-inflicted abortion. The article claims that this piece of art is exemplary of an "Immaturity, self-importance and a certain confused earnestness" that is apparently encouraged by Yale's pedagogical practices.
2. Other posters responded by saying that said piece of performance art was a hoax--making it exemplary of nothing. Since this was debunked months ago, your face should be red. So should the face of the professor who wrote the article, who like you suffers from a terminal complex of self-importance which led him to fall for the hoax created by the Yale student who wrote an op-ed piece about a piece of performance art that didn't exist.
3. You claim that those posters didn't read the article. This is, I've noticed, your fallback position--which is fine, I guess, if you don't like to debate stuff.
I hope it's clearer now--but I sense you're someone who has a hard time admitting fault, so I think the best thing is just to slink away and let this thread fall into obscurity along with your millions of others.
|
Well allow me to Rebut....
1) Aliza Shvart's "art" was one of three examples given by the author though it was certainly the main one since at the time of the article's writing it was certainly headline news. As clearly written, "Or so she claimed; whether she actually did any of this remains unclear." the author doubted the authenticity. But whether her art authentic or not wasn't the point of the article.
Which goes to answer #2:
- Why would anyone who actually read this article and comprehended it talk about talk about "inflammatory posts" and "hoaxes". It is about the author's opinion about how art should be taught.
So....
#3 why focus on this hoax when the article is about a more traditional teaching method? Because the people either did NOT read the article or simple did not understand what the author was saying.
Finally, thanks for the psychoanalysing and the offhanded insult. A lot to do about an article on Art.