Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Merlion" data-source="post: 3120070" data-attributes="member: 10397">Like I said, there was a bit of misunderstanding.However, all of Umbran's points still stand. But shoes can be judged objectively by physical standards that everyone can agree on. Shoes that fall apart in a day are badly made, because they dont serve their purpose. However, the primary purpose of most artistic works is to be enjoyed, and everybody has different ideas of whats enjoyable. And even within your acadmeic criteria, not all of the expert critics agree. Thats why its subjective.That leads me to a question. Two actually. you've established that in your opinion, wether a written work is good or bad depends on standards of plot, characterization, voice etc as set down by the academic elite. Ok so heres what I question about that1) I asked this one before, but you didnt address it, and I guess its actually several related questions itself. What exactly gives them the right to make those decisions? How are they decided on? How do they decide well this type of plot is bad and that type is good, this voice should always be used for this and never that etc. How can it be anything other than their opinions?2) what if the elite experts disagree on something? Either on the "good" or "bad" of a specific work, or on the principals themselves? If two equally well trained "experts" both read a book, and one declares it "good" and the other that its "bad", which one is right? Doesnt the fact that this can happen mean that the criteria your so fond of are indeed subjective opinion and not objective law? You misunderstood again, although admitedly I didnt go into a lot of detail.What I meant was, there are some of those among your gods of literature who believe that ALL fantasy fiction, the very style and subject matter of fantasy fiction, automatically go against the criteria you mentioned and are all automatically "bad writing", based on their interpretation of those criteria. First, as Mark Hope says, conversation doesnt soley imply making a judgement about the works quality. I would think someone of your credentials would realize that. One can still simply discuss the work itself apart from rating it, and even though enjoyment and quality are subjective, many find it interesting to find out other peoples opinions and the reasons behind them anyway. It is, to a point, but that doesnt invalidate discussion of it. Anymore than your theory of absolute right and wrong of writting does. In your view you can look at a work and immediately determine its legitmacy with no discussion needed (except not really, because even using your criteria, you've even said it can vary, because some works may fail "the test" in some areas, but shine in others).Also, as I've mentioned, I do feel that some works are *better written* than others. And that all authors can grow and improve and have flaws, and having those pointed out can help that proccess. Again you misunderstand. This is my belief. Anything, especially a creative work, that a person puts time, energy, thought and feeling into has worth and value and is not "bad", or "crap" in any objective sense, regardless of anyone's opinion. Enjoyment of the work, is entirely a matter of read/viewer opinion.Technical quality, in a creative work is a diffacult thing. There are certain standards or practices or whatever that are generally accepted as good to follow, however they can be broken or even unintentionaly glossed over to still result in a good work. This area has some partially objective aspects, but depending on the works finall purpose will probably still be subjective.  This is another thing I'm surprised someone of your self proffessed expertise and intelligence needs to ask, especially since I've stated it more than once.It also makes me think you tend to see and think of things in a very narrow focused way, which is probably why you apparently did well in school.I have been speaking almost the entire time about general principles, brought on by some peoples posting about Eragon. People assuming it must be terrible because a 15 year old wrote it, and people stating that it sucks or its awful, simply because they didnt enjoy it, sparked me to comment on the broader issues. The fact that age and writing ability dont neccesarily have anything to do with each other, and the fact that its almost impossible for a creative work to be objectively "bad". Discussions have a way of growing you know.</blockquote>

Verification