+0

Does Bersani's quote mean "the reason for the fact that a large percent of people are not interested in art is not that art is not effective or influential, but is that people are interested in objects while art is so pure that it avoids objects"?

Quote:

Leo Bersani puts forward a theory of sublimation in which ‘the disinterestedness generally associated with
art...is the sign not of a lack of affect but rather of a drive so pure that it covets no objects.’

Comments  

Bersani seems to be one of those rare individuals who knows what "disinterested" means. It does not mean "not interested". It means something more like "detached", "not engaged", "unbiased".

Hi. Thank you. So, which of these interpretations is OK:


1. the disinterestedness generally associated with art...is not the sign of the lack of emotions in people, but is because the desire of people is so pure that it can not accept any external object as art.


or


2. the disinterestedness generally associated with art...is not the sign of the lack of influence in art, but is because art is so pure that it can not contain any objects and is purely subjective.