Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland
For the same reason that we didn't liquidate the term "painting" because of people like Pollock and Rauschenberg. It doesn't necessarily comply with convention, but that doesn't push it out of the range of an umbrella term.
|
Pollock's art was at least still visual. It was everything that a painting was (so far as I know), sans the "normal" act of painting. 4'33, however, has no value other than as performance art.
What exactly makes 4'33 music rather than just art?