All my lousy photographs I sign with the name Monty , works for me.
Is the use of physics jargon for the sake of jargon, or is it to convey complex information between experts in the field? For instance, Virtual Journal of Atomic Quantum Fluids this month has an article on "Properties of Bose-Einstein Condensates and Bose Systems in Lower Dimensions." In this case, the jargon is used to precisely convey quantifiable information. While XKCD may have some fun with it and a Popular Science article would need to define a few things, everybody knows precisely what is being discussed.
When art "terminology" is used, the definitions tend to be historical, histrionic, and sometimes hysterical. Disambiguation of the terminology would leave the art world completely bereft of terminology. The only reason there is terminology in the art world is because its jaded bullshitocracy needs to justify itself. Instead of genetic inbreeding, it's an inbreeding of ideas. The Dada "movement" led to the acceptance of "found objects" (toilets and trash), which of course led to others copying the "form," which leads to a bullshitocracy to make up words to lend legitimacy to a bunch of poser junk. Thus, we have the word, "auratic," which basically means that something is art because someone who claims to be an artist says that an object or action is art.
No, actually I think I was pretty clear about physics papers not being jargon for the sake of jargon. The point was that in aesthetics (which presumably I think you were referring to as 'art "terminology"') it needn't be either.
Since according to this article B/W is on the rise again we should found a new movement and write a manifest. Group or movement name something like the B/Wees or BWralists and title of the manifest Abolish Color or something along those lines
Dominik
In I.T., I sometimes use excessive Jargon for Jargon's sake, so I can B.S. without lying or so I won't have to explain things to someone who really doesn't need to know. Something was diagnosed as a Pebkac problem, or using the term "cloud computing service" to mean "handled off site because your inhouse expert is the problem".
IT people do use it to facilitate communications between themselves to a small extent, but we also mock it's use in news articles, press releases, and "white papers". Excessive and needless Jargon is indeed a matter of taste, and too much is bad taste that sets off the BS detectors.
Bookmarks