On (06 Apr 06) Cindy Haglund wrote to George Pope...
 CH>  GP> Didn't you say you liked art that represents things (eg.
 CH> landscape)?
 CH>
 CH>  Represent? Not as in fake, but to replicate ? YES! Espeically
 CH> Impressionism and um... last time I SAW you did'nt need to hear.
 CH>
 CH> But let me state this again for the record that I know realize the
 CH> whole thing was to do what OUGHT to be a foregone conclusion. Get the
 CH> truly "disabled" to realize even deaf people can do art.

No, I don't believe that was it, because that's too obvious. . . it was
to have people(deaf OR hearing) creating paintings or drawings that
somehow represented(keyword here) deafness,within the theme (eg. "Deaf
people can do everything except hear.")

 CH>  Deafness is not a visaul representation unless you want to visualize
 CH> a deaf person sitting amid chatting family members ignoringher but she
 CH> better
 CH> not pout about it or go entertain hereslf elsewhere.... lest she upset
 CH> them with THEIR discomfort.
 CH>
 CH> HOly shit now that wuold be a good pic but then hearing people who
 CH> have known lonliness for other reasons have already done so.

Now you're seeing wh;t's meant by "deaf-themed art". . .

But it's not likely they'd have such a dark theme as that above example
would fit into!

Because I care,
|<+]::-)  (Cyberpope(the Bishop of ROM!))


--- PPoint 1.76