'Purity' of and in art - any art, including music and dance - is an illusory notion, of course. It may be remotely conceivable or imaginable, but it can't be realized because it can't be recognized any more than a 'pure' human being or a 'pure' (or, for that matter, gratuitous) act can be. All the same, for Western art in its Modernist phase 'purity' has been a useful idea and ideal, with a kind of logic to it that has worked, and still works, to generate aesthetic value and maintain aesthetic standards as nothing else in our specializing culture has over the last hundred-odd years. But this logic has also worked to exclude the decorative - the decorative insofar as it functions solely as decoration. It's as though aesthetic value, quality, could be preserved only by concentrating on 'absolute' or 'autonomous' art: thus on visual art - including even architecture - that held and moved and stirred the beholder as sheer decoration could not. Decoration is asked to be 'merely' pleasing, 'merely' embellishing, and the 'functional' logic of Modernism leaves no room, apparently, for such 'mereness.' This is part of the pity of Modernism, one of the sacrifices it enjoins....