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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="grimslade" data-source="post: 3132621" data-attributes="member: 6061">All art has valueI will grant that no art is worthless in the literal sense.If you take the abstraction of worth down to the lowest possible denominator, there is worth in everything. Strike 'worthless' from the argument from now on. I don't think anyone has been arguing for saying something is literally worthless.What we are saying is that there is a scale of quality to art. You do not experience art in a vacuum. No one is sceptical enough to judge every piece of art as if it is unique. Your previous experience is factored in to each new experience. You create your own value scale of what you like and judge the new work to those prior standards.  Here's the kicker though, unless you have lived your entire life as some hermit in a cave, you have been influenced by the culture you live in. So a lot of those value judgements you make come from the society you live in and are the same as all the other unique snowflakes out there. This is what makes up the standards we can grade art on. Some art is better than others because out of the numerous experiences/experiments we have had, there are common denominators that have shown through. I'll even agree with you that no one can just say "This work is bad" as a fact.  They need to back it up. "This work is bad because..." with appropriate reasons is valid.  There are conventions that make up a form. Break too many of the conventions and the art is poor. It no longer fits into the form. Art without context is just raw stimulus.</blockquote>

Verification