Quote:
Originally Posted by fresnelly
You're fixated on Quality as a requirement for Art. I think an expression can be poorly executed or unengaging and still be Art, as long as the intent is there.
I don't think that I'm "fixated" on quality. I just wonder if quality has some relevance to what art is, and what is art. I do know that if I set out to make a chocolate cake and it turns out to be a quarter inch thick roadapple, that most civilian consumers wouldn't let me get away with calling it chocolate cake, even though that was the intent. Should other cooks defend it and call it cake because the intent was there? Or can cooking not be a metaphor for art?
Realizing that you don't have to respect a work of art, even though it is classified as such, is quite liberating actually. |
I've never had a problem with that last part.
I love some modern art, especially early to mid twentieth century, but some of it is just self indulgent crap, and I don't mind saying so. Just my opinion, of course, but some of it is outright con or scam, or a variation on the emperor's new clothes.
Lindy