Donald Satz wrote:

>Roberto Strappafelci writes concerning the meaning of Art:
>
>>There is no final meaning or value, only different readings in different
>>places at different times.
>
>That's about right.  If there is a final meaning, what source determines
>that meaning?  Getting a handle on a "definitive value" is like chasing the
>wind.

The HIP movement just moves in the opposite direction (and I have nothing
against this).  Anyway, my point was that behind statements such as "let's
stop pontificating about objective views" there is always the acceptance of
a different objective view.  Super-parts positions about this matter often
reveal inclination to "enlightened despotism".  As an alternative, we ought
to tell Mr.  Jauss that his Aesthetics of Reception and Response Theory was
just the discovery of hot water.  But don't count on me.

Roberto Strappafelci