A few clarifications.yovargas wrote:This is something that almost always comes up in discussions of art and the logical endpoint of this perspective is that criticism becomes meaningless and anything can be art if you want it to be. While some people will argue that this is a legitimate view of art, the end result of it is the modern-day phenomena of museums filled with nonsense being passed off as something people should care about. I don't buy it one bit.Passdagas the Brown wrote:Your comment makes an assumption that I find very problematic. That the definition of a "flaw" in literature is settled and agreed upon. Opinions of art and literature are subjective, no matter the attempts to systematize the good and the bad. No offense to those who make literary criticism their lives, but one simply cannot fully professionalize the practice of writing and criticizing literature.
Art needs honest attempts at objective criticism (such as your last few excellent posts in response to ax) or art descends into emptiness.
(Also, your quote goes very much against the grain of recent statements like "I really have no respect for the criticism of the dwarven singing." If it's all subjective, you should respect all viewpoints!)
1. I am not advocating for 100% relativity in discussion and criticism. There are some rules of thumb, though to elevate them beyond "guides" and into "science" is a mistake. Yes, one can safely say that Apocalypse Now is a more artistically sound film than Kazaam, featuring Shaquille O'Neil. But...
2. There is a difference between respecting a viewpoint (or disrespecting it) and arguing that it is illegitimate. This is the difference between a matter of taste and a matter of fact. In that context, I will happily disrespect the opinion that Kazaam is a better film, but I will not say that it is wrong. Identifying the parameters for "right and wrong," or "good and bad" are not prerequisities for meaningful debate about the arts. It is enough to lay out some common guidelines, and argue within those guidelines, or defend those guidelines if they are assaulted (or even revise them, if the assault succeeds)! In short, vigorous debate about the arts may be more meaningful because there are far fewer (or no) certainties, as we have in the physical sciences. The theory of relativity is basically right. Full stop. Is Wagner's Ring Cycle any good? Pages and pages of discussion.
3. I have often heard your criticism of modern art, in particular, and all I can say is that I disagree with it (if indeed you are referring to modern art). Though I have a soft spot for ancient and "flat" medieval art myself, I also love the minimalism of good modern art (and include some of it in my home). To me, a lot of it harkens back to simpler forms (sometimes tribal, or basically geometric) that predate the "scientificization" of art during the Renaissance (with its heavy emphasis on 'perspective'), and I find that satisfying. I'll take a Rothko or a Rauschenberg over a Michelangelo any day. It's also why, among Tolkien artists, I prefer Cor Blok to John Howe. Is that an illegitimate opinion? I don't think so. Do you have to respect it? No, I don't think so.
4. I agree with the need for objective criticism. Some typologies, frameworks and standards are necessary for constructive debate. However, I do not believe these structures are indestructible. If someone came along and compellingly demonstrated why my taste in art was built on a shaky foundation, I would keep an open mind about it. After all, just because we don't "like" something, it doesn't mean that it is not a "something." And if we consider it for a while, we may find that we like it!
5. Substantiating one's opinion is important. Just saying "I like Tolkien's landscape descriptions" is certainly not enough, if one is making the case for it being "good writing." That is why I elaborated on it, and am happy that you and axordil encouraged me to do so! The same goes for someone who likes the red dot on a canvas in the MoMA. Why do you like it? Why is it art? If you have thoughtful answers, I'll listen.
- PtB