At 11:10 PM 5/27/98 -0500, Carrol wrote:
>It is not self-evident to me that art should persuade the unpersuaded.
>Rather, though it may have innumerable specific functions (including
>perhaps none at all), its audience should always be those who are already
>at least tentatively committed to the struggle. It deepens their
>commitment; it lets them talk to each other about their commitment or
>their tasks; it may simply entertain those in struggle. Most of the
>nastier fights over revolutionary (or simply progressive) art all stem
>from this assumption that it should persuade.
I don't think _all_ art should "persuade the unpersuaded." (Hey, I want to see GODZILLA and thought that INDEPENDENCE DAY was one of the most amusing films I've seen.) But some should and can. My point is that if one wants to persuade, it takes _finesse_.
Jim Devine jdevine at popmail.lmu.edu & http://clawww.lmu.edu/Departments/ECON/jdevine.html "he who is unable to live in society or has no need, because he is sufficient for himself, must be either a beast or a god." -- Aristotle