Apart from small distinctions including the web page number in the first photo as well as the Address “poorlydrawnlines.com” into the 2nd, both of these comics look more or less exactly the same, right? Incorrect. The comic that is second various proportions (based on my web web web browser settings – currently I’ve blown it as much as 24 ? 24 cm), its color tones are very different (dependent on my screen settings), light is mirrored differently off its area, it also glows by itself… to not point out the various feel and smell. Yet, people would state both are identical comic, “Stereotype” by Reza Farazmand.
Would Danto concur? Does he even start thinking about two copies of a numerous to function as work that is same of, two copies of a novel for example? He does, e.g. On p. 33:
I am able to, for instance, burn off a duplicate associated with guide by which a poem is printed, however it is not even close to clear that by doing this We have burned right off the poem, as it seems simple that though the web page was damaged, the poem had not been; and even though it exists elsewhere, state in another content, the poem cannot just be identical with that content. When it comes to reason that is same it is not identified aided by the pages simply burned. … Often sufficient poets and philosophers have actually looked at artworks as therefore just tenuously related to their embodiments.
Doesn’t this contradict the focus Danto puts on“the real way this content is presented” (see above)? Or does not he count himself on the list of “poets and philosophers” who dismiss the form that is physical of artwork? On p. 93-94 it looks like he does:
Cohen has expected that Duchamp’s tasks are maybe perhaps perhaps not the urinal after all however the gesture of exhibiting it; and also the gesture, if that indeed may be the work, does not have any surfaces that are gleaming speak of …. Continue reading Compare this into the after screenshot: