Tuesday, February 21, 2006


"Thus text presents one field of meaning force that can only be understood contextually in relation to other "neighboring" meaning forces - other media elements and living processes" (p. 230).

I know this is probably getting old, but Seaman states the above example, like many other comments in his article, as if it is something new and revolutionary. I don't understand when it was that context wasn't important in any type of visual art or narrative?

I also don't like that there is an advertisement for Seaman's upcoming work, funded by Intel, in the article.


At 12:41 PM, Blogger flook said...



Post a Comment

<< Home