| |
| | [LEAuthors] Leonardo Electronic Almanac vol 12, no 09, September 2004 |
 | | First, the author theorizes the relationship between the two poles of classic and baroque in terms of continuity, instead of split: the neo-baroque era in which we are living is neither the result of a refusal of the classic, nor the outcome of a degenerative process. |
 | | Second, and this is a very logical step in the author's argumentation, Ndalianis' refusal to oppose classic and baroque in an absolute way helps her to re-establish the fundamental historicity of each form taken by both tendencies. |
 | | Ndalianis, who accepts the use of baroque and classic as transhistorical categories and who accepts equally the current definitions of both concepts (following Wölfflin and others, she thus opposes both as open versus closed, or dynamic versus static, etc.), emphatically rejects any binary analysis of their opposition. |
| mailman.mit.edu /pipermail/leaauthors/2004-September/000020.html (9648 words) |
|