I won’t bore you with my symptoms but they are lessening. Rather than the empty DVD platter of yesterday, today it is if I have a badly scratched sucker and I get bits (I watched Exit Through the Gift Shop this afternoon), which appear is association (I was thinking about David Hume and his aesthetic judges) but don’t really relate except perhaps (there was an interesting RSAnimation on wimp today) in a decidedly non-linear fashion. One could almost say my mind is a bit circular today with a horrifying number of speed bumps and the consequent mental hiccups.

I think maybe why I connected Hume and Bansky’s film is the idea of trying to define art. Seems a waste of time really. I mean art is something that is not containable in a delineated concept. I know there have been gadzillion attempts, some of them worthy, but really. Back to Hume…see? I just slide off the mental track.

Hume had this thing about expert judges and how art can best be defined by those guys. I think “art” is word that takes its meaning from the social and linguistic context in which it display’s itself. Combined: the judges are the kings of context. They have imbibed so much knowledge and experience that they come to represent (as best as any one person can) the ethos of the times in which they live. It is that moral quality that is the ultimate context in which a piece can be judged.

OK. But why judge? Because we can’t help ourselves I suppose. Like Thierry in the film, we really want to be accepted and that requires the judgment of our peers. And to question judging at all…I suspect that’s a part of our ethos.

Oh. Are those pink fairies?