Easy to agree with WILLIAM on the art shown.
AB
________________________________
From: john m <[email protected]>
To:
[email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 1:25 PM
Subject:
descriptive aesthetics? (revised)
Sorry to blabber on, but I still feel
compelled to explain my
motivations in this inquiry.
The aim of what I'm
trying to say is to define and make possible (in
my opinion) reasonable
discussion of particular artworks, and to
possibly provide tools to detect and
objectively dismiss irrelevant
criticism.
It's funny - William, in all
earnestness, don't take this personally -
I'm only quoting this because it's
an example on hand, and also
because you can proceed to defend your point:
The first thing I saw when I subscribed to this list (having already
drawn up
my original "main points") was someone posting a link to a
book or exhibition
of "psychedelic" cover art, and William's outburst
of "AWFUL THEN, AWFUL NOW,
AWFUL FOREVER". And I thought wow, didn't I
come to the right place to discuss
objective aesthetics...
What interests me is this: why would anyone utter
that sort of thing?
What end would such a comment serve in a discussion about
a particular
work or works? If I play you a track or show you a painting, and
you
go "that's horrible", what on Earth are you talking about? You're
talking
about yourself. What use? Where does that take us? And if we
take that sort of
a statement to be valid ("to each their own", etc.)
in a discussion about
artworks, for Christ's sake, what sort of
aesthetics does that lead to? For
several years now I've had no
interest whatsoever in discussing with anyone
who starts off a
discussion about artworks on that note, and nevertheless I
always end
up in these conversations, and almost never do they lead to
anything
of interest or utility.
