Reply to comment

Sontag says that interpretation is not allowing ourselves to be open to art itself.  Indeed, she does not want us to even try to interpret art.  But why is this?  If we do not interpret art, then what is its purpose?  Can art be only for our pleasure and entertainment?  But then, if it was, would there really be a point to art?  Indeed, in Thursday’s lecture we came to discover that art could have another purpose if it was to create something new.  In fact, Sontag does not want us to interpret art because this does not let us find a new way of seeing things since we are trying to interpret it with what we already know so with our past and history. 

Is see that Sontag is a bridge to this transition because she says that by not trying to interpret art, we see what is new, we let newness invade ourselves, which can then lead us to a whole new evolution.  However, doesn’t evolution have a past?  So, could we come up with something absolutely new or is it still influenced by our history?