Karl Miller <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Somewhat related to all of this, someone on this list (can't remember who)
>wrote something about the function of art being to address the emotions.
>I find that notion too limiting, for I also believe that art should also
>be able to address our rational thinking.

Since there is no clear-cut line between emotion and rational thinking, I
would agree.  But I would say that this is not the "function" of art, but
more like the reason it exists; that reason being the fact that art is able
to engage the complete mental "metabolism" of a (properly receptive) human
observer (audience), including emotions, rationality, blood chemistry,
..etc

Ulvi
[log in to unmask]