Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 8811783" data-attributes="member: 59082">Yes, of course. And the contrary is also true: just because you perceive the show to have artistic merit, doesn't mean it is present in some kind of objective, intrinsic way.Which is why I think the most peaceful compromise--at least for us--is accepting that different people have different tastes. To one person, a banana nailed to a wall is a gimmick, while to another it is a powerful artistic statement. Art is funny like that. At the very least, much (if not all) of what we call &quot;art&quot; or &quot;artistic&quot; is in the eye and mind of the beholder. What is strange, presumably for both of us, is that we seemingly have very different criteria as to what constitutes &quot;artistic merit,&quot; as if we come from entirely different schools of literary and cinematic aesthetics. I wonder if we'd find other areas in which we're so polarized - be they films, shows, books, etc, or if this is an anomaly.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mercurius, post: 8811783, member: 59082"] Yes, of course. And the contrary is also true: just because you perceive the show to have artistic merit, doesn't mean it [I]is [/I]present in some kind of objective, intrinsic way. Which is why I think the most peaceful compromise--at least for us--is accepting that different people have different tastes. To one person, a banana nailed to a wall is a gimmick, while to another it is a powerful artistic statement. Art is funny like that. At the very least, much (if not all) of what we call "art" or "artistic" is in the eye and mind of the beholder. What is strange, presumably for both of us, is that we seemingly have very different criteria as to what constitutes "artistic merit," as if we come from entirely different schools of literary and cinematic aesthetics. I wonder if we'd find other areas in which we're so polarized - be they films, shows, books, etc, or if this is an anomaly. [/QUOTE]

Verification