You do not have access to Duchamp's thoughts.Thus, all you can possibly be expressing are your own opinions, or someone else's. The fact that you do so in such a condescending way is not particularly endearing.
(
mofaha ┐( ˘_˘)┌ ʅ(́◡◝)ʃ,
Wed 26 Dec 2007, 5:43,
archived)
Duchampdid not publicly explain his work but that does not mean that the consensus is incorrect.
(,
Wed 26 Dec 2007, 5:46,
archived)
Neither does it mean that it is correct.I repeat, all you're expressing is your own, or someone else's, opinions.
( mofaha ┐( ˘_˘)┌ ʅ(́◡◝)ʃ,
Wed 26 Dec 2007, 5:48,
archived)
BTWI'm sorry if I've sounded condesending in my posts. I've not intended that at all and I'd rather people read my posts with the voice of an interested informed nobody.
(,
Wed 26 Dec 2007, 5:49,
archived)
Well, even if Duchamp was speakinghe'd still only be expressing Duchamp's opinions about what Duchamp thinks. Still prone to errors.
(,
Wed 26 Dec 2007, 5:47,
archived)
Without sarcasmYou may be a genius. (I'm going to bed. Merry Christmas)
(,
Wed 26 Dec 2007, 5:51,
archived)
Goodnightit's nice that an interested informed nobody thinks I'm a possible genius. I think.
(,
Wed 26 Dec 2007, 6:00,
archived)
Cya, merry xmas.Come play again soon.
(
Tahkcalb ω∞ for sigs,
Wed 26 Dec 2007, 6:11,
archived)