Thursday, 31 August 2006

Are there objective standards in art?

Just a heads up to readers that there's a healthy conversation on this topic going on at the 'Con Art in Kaipara' post.

Can we say about art, "That's good," or "That's crap"? I say, "Yes." My interlocutor says "No."

Enjoy the discussion -- and feel free to add your thoughts.



  1. Was watching the first episode of Swedish Idol, you know, where everyone tries out. It is almost uniformly possible for everyone to agree "you can sing" or "you are tonedeaf with no talent". The only disagreement is "you are good, but are you good enough to go on to the next round?"

    There are objective standards for singing. Maybe because you can't close your eyes you can get away with saying their aren't objective standards for visual art?

  2. There used to be objective standards. "Aesthetics" was the philosophy or theory of beauty. Such ideas have gone out of fashion - likely because they differentiate between true genius and talentless hacks. And we can't have that!

  3. PC - I'll email you the first building at lunchtime-ish today.

    I have a long critique of your objective conception of artistic merit on the boil as well.


  4. Excellent Den. I look forward to it. :-)


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.