Re: That sneaky intentional fallacy fallacy

From: Jim Carlile (email suppressed)
Date: Fri Mar 27 2009 - 16:31:17 PDT

In a message dated 3/27/2009 3:27:01 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
email suppressed writes:

The intentional fallacy arises when the maker isn't offering an
interpretation, but is claiming that there is content in the work that the work does not
really contain.

Not sure what 'intentional fallacy' you're talking about, but the I-F comes
into play when critics or outside observers assess the artist's "intent" when
judging the work. The whole "fallacy" part is when critics judge
'intentionality' (sic) to be germane as to what the work is about.
According to I-F theorists (if they still exist) what counts is the work
itself and 'how' it works to do what it does-- even if the artist is unaware of
what's going on, which is often the case.
BTW, artists can say anything they want to about their works, but their
words are not the I-F. That can only be committed by the outsiders, strictly
**************Check all of your email inboxes from anywhere on the web. Try
the new Email Toolbar now!

For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.