> On the other issue, re-constructing somekind of cultural analysis that
> incorporates mass, popular, without the more usual asethetic hierarchy
> of taste. For this, we need a different set of conceptual constructs,
> something along the lines of the dialectic between the concrete and the
> imaginary, rather than high-low, good-bad, etc.
I'm all for jettisoning the last two oppositions, but I'm not entirely sure what "the dialectic between the concrete and the imaginary" means -- is the real/imaginary (in the psychoanalytic sense), or something else?
Catherine
------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP at ArtsIT: http://admin.arts.usyd.edu.au/horde/imp/