re: #290 WindUpBird

haha well, it’s still art? But maybe it’s not GOOD art :D I’m more about people who have something to say, know that it IS offensive, and say it because they have to.

Heh. My dad and I were just discussing (he’s an academic, a medievalist) whether the letters of authors should be treated differently than their texts— especially when they’re well-known enough to know that their letters will be read after their deaths. To what extent are we to think the communication is really for the intended recipient, and how much to the audience at large? Does it matter what actual effect the letters had, or intended to have, on their recipients? Are the letters art first, or actual communications first? Is there an important difference, or is, as Prince would say, the artist is the person and whatever they do is art?