<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Re: Update</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.haverford.edu/amongfriends/2009/02/12/re-update/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.haverford.edu/amongfriends/2009/02/12/re-update/</link>
	<description>2009 Mellon Symposium</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 May 2010 08:59:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam Kaplan</title>
		<link>http://blogs.haverford.edu/amongfriends/2009/02/12/re-update/#comment-109</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam Kaplan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 07:04:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.haverford.edu/blogs/amongfriends/?p=662#comment-109</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Haverford grad. I was mostly the one throwing around &quot;artists&quot; and &quot;non-artists,&quot; so I feel like I should respond. You&#039;re right, both terms are pretty problematic, especially for college students who might not consider themselves much of anything yet. I used those terms because Harrell uses them and because people have used them to describe his work.

But I think Harrell&#039;s and the other artists&#039; desires to reconcile the terms—which are, you know, at odds or whatever in the &quot;real world,&quot; where people are either &quot;artists&quot; or &quot;non-artists&quot;—will be even easier to satisfy at Haverford because, as you say, students don&#039;t really classify themselves in that way (or at least one would hope that they don&#039;t).

As for a definition of art in 30 words or less, Harrell says, &quot;Let me define &#039;art&#039; as anything that anyone calls &#039;art&#039;&quot; (from &quot;Some Thoughts on Art and Education,&quot; available on his website or at http://web2.uwindsor.ca/courses/visual/wcl/596/Site/fletcher.html).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Haverford grad. I was mostly the one throwing around &#8220;artists&#8221; and &#8220;non-artists,&#8221; so I feel like I should respond. You&#8217;re right, both terms are pretty problematic, especially for college students who might not consider themselves much of anything yet. I used those terms because Harrell uses them and because people have used them to describe his work.</p>
<p>But I think Harrell&#8217;s and the other artists&#8217; desires to reconcile the terms—which are, you know, at odds or whatever in the &#8220;real world,&#8221; where people are either &#8220;artists&#8221; or &#8220;non-artists&#8221;—will be even easier to satisfy at Haverford because, as you say, students don&#8217;t really classify themselves in that way (or at least one would hope that they don&#8217;t).</p>
<p>As for a definition of art in 30 words or less, Harrell says, &#8220;Let me define &#8216;art&#8217; as anything that anyone calls &#8216;art&#8217;&#8221; (from &#8220;Some Thoughts on Art and Education,&#8221; available on his website or at <a href="http://web2.uwindsor.ca/courses/visual/wcl/596/Site/fletcher.html" rel="nofollow">web2.uwindsor.ca/courses/visual/wcl/596/Site/fletcher.html</a>).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DJ Overload</title>
		<link>http://blogs.haverford.edu/amongfriends/2009/02/12/re-update/#comment-105</link>
		<dc:creator>DJ Overload</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 20:55:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.haverford.edu/blogs/amongfriends/?p=662#comment-105</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This make me feel really good]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This make me feel really good</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hc grad</title>
		<link>http://blogs.haverford.edu/amongfriends/2009/02/12/re-update/#comment-104</link>
		<dc:creator>hc grad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 20:46:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.haverford.edu/blogs/amongfriends/?p=662#comment-104</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[a few hc graduates watched the livestream at james&#039; bidding. all  seemed impressed by the project itself and each pair&#039;s commitment to it. I think students stand to benefit most from the project&#039;s participatory aspect - the way it suggests that art and artists are not to be cordoned off into hermetic categories, that undergraduates and acclaimed artists can collaborate and learn equaly from each other. I was a bit disappointed to hear some talk of &quot;art&quot; and &quot;non-art,&quot; students who &quot;are creative but not artists.&quot; I&#039;m not sure students should be too eager to classify themselves in such certain terms. They should explore what being artists means before the boundaries of their profession (or the marketplace, their audience, wider community, whatever) confine self-identification to practical terms. Also, anyone should try to define &#039;art&#039; in 30 words or less before they throw around &#039;non-art.&#039;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>a few hc graduates watched the livestream at james&#8217; bidding. all  seemed impressed by the project itself and each pair&#8217;s commitment to it. I think students stand to benefit most from the project&#8217;s participatory aspect &#8211; the way it suggests that art and artists are not to be cordoned off into hermetic categories, that undergraduates and acclaimed artists can collaborate and learn equaly from each other. I was a bit disappointed to hear some talk of &#8220;art&#8221; and &#8220;non-art,&#8221; students who &#8220;are creative but not artists.&#8221; I&#8217;m not sure students should be too eager to classify themselves in such certain terms. They should explore what being artists means before the boundaries of their profession (or the marketplace, their audience, wider community, whatever) confine self-identification to practical terms. Also, anyone should try to define &#8216;art&#8217; in 30 words or less before they throw around &#8216;non-art.&#8217;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
