Cythraul
Active Member
- Dec 10, 2003
- 6,755
- 134
- 63
so whats the objective measure of 'quality'?
art is a communicative medium, how the fuck do you evaluate it without taking into account the attitudes of the observer towards it? how the fuck is the subjective experience of art separable from its objective essence?
oh that's right IT ISNT you fucking dumbfuck
This makes little sense. Nobody ever claimed that the evaluation of works of art doesn't involve subjective experience. It's also equally obvious that observers take various attitudes towards works of art. None of those points settles the question of whose attitude, if any, is the correct one to take regarding the quality of a work of art. Why should anyone's attitude be taken into account moreso here than in any other domain, in so far as we want to settle the question of something's quality? Since when was somebody's subjective attitude towards something relevant to the truth of any claim at all?