So, V leaves a message asking "what have you gotten from readin' that?"
Let me tell you-even though I haven't finished it. It's good practice for all the papers I'm writing as part of my studies.
Largely, it is an examination of what constitutes an "object" in performance art. Since the 60's, 70's, art has begun to abandon the mimetic forms in favor of ideas and performance. It has, increasingly, favored this idea that that the experience of art is the kernel, the gist of what is important about art and that the object--the sculpture, the photo, the painting--is simply an instrument of said change and therefore, not the "thing" to be celebrated... The internal change created in the viewer/participant by the art performance/experience is the thrust of the art...
That's what I am getting from it so far. OK, so, actually, I knew that, so technically, what I am getting from the book is another reference for the paper and an academic knowledge of performance, a rounding out of my understanding.
It's both tedious and exciting. Go figure.
I love school. I always have. Ok, I just love learning. I find it amusing that I never thought I would enjoy teaching, becasue I love that too. Mostly, I just feel as though I go in and share what little I know and why I love it so. People respond to my being excited far better than "being taught".
It's such a gift to love what one loves. I know, duh... But... DUH!!! It's glorious all the same.