Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site hound.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!edsel!bentley!hoxna!houxm!hound!rfg
From: rfg@hound.UUCP (R.GRANTGES)
Newsgroups: net.music,net.music.classical
Subject: Re: Progress, the Arts, Razor Blades and Bull
Message-ID: <963@hound.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 27-Feb-85 17:38:29 EST
Article-I.D.: hound.963
Posted: Wed Feb 27 17:38:29 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 1-Mar-85 08:13:44 EST
References: <8347@brl-tgr.ARPA>, <109@spar.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 17
Xref: watmath net.music:6279 net.music.classical:930

[]
Of course there is progress in the arts. If you accept any
conventional definition of progress. Arts are made by people
using tools and the tools improve. What if Leonardo had available
the paints we have today. That doesn't make our painters Leonardos,
but given equal talent (almost never happens - or hasn't happened yet)
more can be done by the artist with the better tools. What if a 
Leonardo or a Titian could work in the present audio-visual arts?
Furthermore, I assert that the works of Leonardo (practically a 
modern) are in every way superior to those of "Ugh, the Nut" well
known neanderthal artist of the middle period. Of course all of
Ugh's works have disappeared while Leonardos have not, but that's
progress for you.

-- 

"It's the thought, if any, that counts!"  Dick Grantges  hound!rfg