BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS Archives

The listserv where the buildings do the talking

BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-transfer-encoding:
7bit
Sender:
Royal Order of Lacunae Pluggers <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: Integrity vs. authenticity
From:
Robert Cagnetta <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 23 Mar 2001 07:18:55 -0500
Content-type:
text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Mime-version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Royal Order of Lacunae Pluggers <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (11 lines) 
 So, authenticity is staying true, or is genuine to the original fabric.  It
is not a copy, and sort of a Ruskin approach would be that there is no way
to reproduce something authentic.  So, then if integrity is staying whole or
undeminished, then a design can remain intact if there are elements
reproduced.  Yet the integrity is compromised when elements are added to a
design that are not part of the original intent.

And I did have to look it up, and somehow I still stick by my original
statement.  Joke?, never heard it.  Is that like gullable isn't in the
dictionary?

ATOM RSS1 RSS2