Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: kawaii trunks@********.org
Subject: Quality of Art Ranting (OT, I think)
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 16:17:50 -0400
Since art (or "Art" as some prefer it) is almost completely subjective,
isn't arguing the merits of "good" or "bad" art kinda .. well..
pointless?

(On the other hand, this is prolly OT and should be taken off list.)

And don't get me started on the concept of Objectivity, an long standing
discussion that a few friends and I have been known to argue for days at a
time. ;)

Ever lovable and always scrappy,
kawaii
Message no. 2
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: Quality of Art Ranting (OT, I think)
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 16:44:12 -0400
From: "kawaii" <trunks@********.org>
> Since art (or "Art" as some prefer it) is almost completely subjective,
> isn't arguing the merits of "good" or "bad" art kinda .. well..
pointless?

And yet you started a topic on it... :)

There really are objective qualities used to judge art, kawaii. From these
we get composition, balance, tonality, harmony, internal consistancy, etc.
These are some of the standards by which great art is judged. Some are more
objective than others, but, if things are to be judged - and such is our
way - we must assign [sometimes arbitrary, admittedly] standards to art.

> (On the other hand, this is prolly OT and should be taken off list.)

I think it will most likely be forced offlist soon. It's OT, and, evidently,
inflammatory.

> And don't get me started on the concept of Objectivity, an long standing
> discussion that a few friends and I have been known to argue for days at a
> time. ;)

That's a common argument amongst students of philosophy and art. I've
labored at it myself, and reached the conclusion that, while nothing is
necessarily truly objective, we must assume a certain degree of it in
ourselves and in others if we desire to feel as if we are accomplishing
anything. Otherwise, we all stand around saying, "everyone's opinion is
equal and equally valid," which is a useless falsity.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Quality of Art Ranting (OT, I think), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!