Talk:Clayton Colvin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

[edit] Unintelligible comment

We read:

Colvin claims to speak in a language all his own. Lingual complexities give way to a universal knowledge hidden away in the fabric of his work. Contour here lies in the fact that as a society we are sometimes grouped and categorized by hard-edge lines, but fundamentally we are very much the same. -Jon Coffelt

Does this mean anything, and if so, what? -- Hoary 15:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

This must be in relation to the exhibition he was in Maybe what should be included with the curators name is what it is in reference to. Says this in a curatorial statement on Schedler Minchin Gallery website ..... added on 13 Dec 06 by 68.167.67.136

Thanks for the start at identifying this (which is necessary if it's to be included), but I still don't understand the meanings of:

• as a society we are sometimes grouped and categorized by hard-edge lines, but fundamentally we are very much the same (let's call this [A])
• Contour here lies in the fact that [A]
• Lingual complexities (let's call this [B])
• a universal knowledge (let's call this [C])
• [B] give way to [C] hidden away in the fabric of his work.
• Whether what follows the first sentence is (a) what Coffelt thinks about Colvin's work or (b) what Coffelt thinks that Colvin claims about Colvin's work. (If (a), why the first sentence? If (b), why not quote Colvin directly?)

Other people may well understand this better than I do, but I have trouble believing that anybody finds it very lucid. If people don't find it lucid, I don't understand why it's worth quoting. But I'm willing to be persuaded. -- Hoary 02:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Still no explanation forthcoming, so I'm about to delete it. Hoary 23:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)