1.) One thing that was interesting to me as I read John Cage (1912-1992) 'On Robert Rauschenberg, Artist, and his Work' was how after discussing how he makes art, he slightly changes subjects and says: "art is the imitation of nature in her manner of operation." I got to thinking about what that really meant and if that stood true. Everything that is on this earth is game for inspiration of art and everything that makes up the world comes from a natural source which is in operation. Do you think that this statement stands true? Is art the imitation of nature in her manner of operation?

2.) A second thing that was worth mentioning came as I was reading Jasper Johns interview with David Sylvester. The part of the conversation where they are talking about the purpose of making art. John Jasper says: " I don't think it's a purposeful thing to make something to be looked at, but i think the perception of the object [artwork] is through looking and through thinking. And I think any meaning we give to it comes through our looking at it." To me, this is an interesting concept that art shouldn't be made to look at, but we need to look at it in order to think about it give it meaning. What would be your take on this comment by John Jasper?



Chris Rypkema