Search results

As you say, I understand it, but I reject it. Also, although I value and apreciate all the opinions given to me, I know that you and have a variety of differences, some not related directly to this topic, that cause me to view it as a bad idea to enter into direct discussion with you. For that...

see above :)

My point is, objective things cannot be meaningfully disagreed with. You can claim that rocks are soft, or that water runs uphil, but EVERYONE is going to assume your kidding. You say that my definition of objective is too narrow...well the thing is, objectivity is a narrow area, because few...

So your saying being burned by a red hot element or drowning from trying to breathe water goes against established definitions and conventions? :) I'm saying I dont mean theortical science, or debated areas, or areas that cant be proved or disproved. I'm talking the fundemental facts of...

Not quite...I do not feel anyone's opinion is ignorant. On the contrary, I feel everyones opinions are very valid, and that in expressing our opinions we must remember that. I take exception to people claiming their opinions of a specific work of art are absolute facts, and that anyone who feels...

A clarification before I begin slowly making individual replies. When I talk about objective science, I mean things that are physically observable and quantifiable, and that are the same for EVERYONE. Not a majority opinion, but a universal physical fact, such as the fact that if you touch a...

Yea Stephen King-ish and Lovecraftian definitely overlap a bit here and there. "The Mist" is another good example.

Many interesting thoughts, again I apreciate them all even the ones that tend to upset me (perhaps those most of all). You guys are actually helping me to fully understand this issue and my place in it, and I'm thankful for that I will reply properly to people when I've got enough energy to do...

Not a meaningful one. Thats sort of the point...each person determines for themselves whats "good" or "bad" Just because you and a few other people like it, and most other people dont, doesnt make it "objectively" bad. It means its bad for most people, and good for a few others. An opinion...

I know, but it looks like it may be the first one to be decent, at least in my opinion. It was a Night Gallery episode

Its interesting that you post this now, because I have a friend at work who's a visual artist and he and his agent might be wanting me to work on writing a script for them, and if something came of that it occured to me that I should try and do a script for a deccent lovecraft movie. But it...

I understand that I'm frustrating some of you, and we seem to be going around in circles. I'm a bit frustrated with myself as I'm having trouble expressing what it is that i'm getting at in a way that anyone else could understand. I'm going to try and come up with a way to word it and organize...

Well I'm glad you think so. That is, sort of what I'm getting at. However, many seem to disagree and feel that if the "crafted" part as you put it doesnt fit a set of criteria, the whole spiel is worthless. But the trouble is, everyone doesnt actually agree on them. Not all the...

You realize your contradicting yourself here? :-) But do their opinions make it a fact? If the "experts" decide its crap, does that mean it is, and anyone who likes it anyway is just devoid of taste? My point is that many people seem to feel that the value judgements of certain...

Ok so heres the deal. Basically many of you believe in what is essentially a majority rule; that there are certain criteria for each art form that many people accept, and that makes them true, factual, and objective for everyone. A work that does not fit those standards is a "bad" work. It can...

So you really believe its a crap shoot? You create something, and hope the "experts" decide it has worth?

Grammar isnt a matter of opinion though. Nor is spelling...each *langauge* has rules about how the language works. Likewise in music a C note is a C note etc etc, and in visual art a straight line is a straight line and red is red. I'm talking about value judgements being made about what...

Because it also cannot be disproved. Much like another thing I cant mention here due to the rules. I should have added that as a criteria as well... And my "badgering" applies mostly to that "good/bad" thing about specific works. You cant disprove that all art has value anymore than you can...

But who does the judging, and by what criteria? And what makes their judgement(opinion) better than anyone elses? How do you judge an abstract painting? And how does not fitting those judgements make a piece of art "bad" anymore than a random person disliking it?

I agree entirely...indeed to me this is just another facet of the enjoyment and interest that art brings. I just dont think that knowledge and information gives anyone the right to decide a work is "bad" if by bad they mean worthless. Well I wasnt talking about what the creator gets out of...