Re: Has anyone made a real conlang?

Andrew Nowicki wrote:

> Dan Jones wrote:
> DJ> Art doesn't have to be *useful*. How *useful*,
> DJ> exactly is the Mona Lisa? How is being viewed
> DJ> making the art *useful*? Were the cave paintings
> DJ> of Lasceaux "useless" before they were discovered.
>
> These are not the best examples of pure art. Mona
> Lisa did not have the Nikon Coolpix camera, so she
> had to hire a painter. The Lasceaux paintings
> probably had animistic (religious) significance.
You don't answer my question, and I fail to see the relevance of Nikon's
products. Also, a painting is an expression of the painter, as well as the
subject. It's not just a "picture". Truly, your workld must be a bleak and
tedious place if you don't appreciate art. Art is what sets us aside from
animals- not science and technology. Apes can use and make tools, but they
don't make art, this is solely the preserve of humanity and, arguably, the
divine, but then again I can take a shrewd guess and deduce that you aren't
a religious person, what with divinity not being "rational" or "scientific"
(although widely represented on the internet)

Dan
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ath yw dyned can pob den o rydhad o voenyth, cynanaf â
chraveth.

o Raeth 18 o Gorlavaraed Vethysadec an Dynedad Dyneth

Deiniol Jones

Reply