re-fusing notions that refuse is not entertaining

from Adam Fieled's Blog responding to Nada Gordon about Flarf's "value":

"I refuse to entertain the notion that good art does not need to be memorable. Period."

__________
_______

some problems:

"I" refuse to entertain the notion that good art does not need to be memorable. Period.
I "refuse" to entertain the notion that good art does not need to be memorable. Period.

I refuse to "entertain" the notion that good art does not need to be memorable. Period.

I refuse to entertain "the notion" that good art does not need to be memorable. Period.

I refuse to entertain the notion that "good art" does not need to be memorable. Period.

I refuse to entertain the notion that good art does not "need" to be memorable. Period.

I refuse to entertain the notion that good art does not need to be "memorable." Period.

I refuse to entertain the notion that good art does not need to be memorable. "Period."
I refuse to entertain the notion that good art does not need to be memorable. "Period".
I refuse to entertain the notion that good art does not need to be memorable"." Period"."

. Period.

that's PERIOD SPACE "Period" PERIOD


I refuse to entertain the notion that I do not, at any given moment, entertain a notion that I had previously refused to entertain.
I refuse to entertain the notion that I can remember what notions I was supposed to be refusing and why it was that I was supposed to be refusing them.

I refuse the notion of "memorable", but will gladly "entertain" it (no period

. . .

Is this is a proposition that there is a direct correlation between "memorable" and "good". Can we use google trends to figure out what art is the best?

Is there no great art that is not remembered?

If there is great art that has been lost, perhaps there is not a necessary correlation between how "remembered" a work is and how "memorable" it is?

Does a poem that is "memorable" upon one reading necessarily have more value as "good art" than a poem that needs to be read twice?

How is "memorability" not completely reliant on a given power system's promotion?

How can how "memorable" something is tell us anything more than the biases of whatever individual or group that "remembers"?

. . .

I fuse to "entertain" the notion that "good art does not need to be memorable": Period.

and because it just won't stick:

I re-fuse to "entertain" the notion that "good art does not need to be memorable": Periods...