Hi Cheerskep Just a brief comment:
I don't think one needs reply with a sneer. Rather than: "Well, if you can't see that THE BALD PRIMA DONNA (not a big fan of Beckett so I'll change from WAITING FOR GODOT) is high quality art, God help you," perhaps one just says: "If ... etc.. .then, I'm sorry, but I think it is." What more can one say after all? DA -----Original Message----- From: Tom McCormack [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, 13 November 2012 9:56 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Error and quality Underlying Michael's question -- Why is it people can't distinguish between "mediocrity" and "high quality" in "Art" -- is the assumption that there is a "fact of the matter" about the "quality" in any given work. "Sophisticated" people regularly assume there is such a "fact of the matter", and usually their response to anyone who disagrees is a sneer: "Well, if you can't see that WAITING FOR GODOT is high quality art, God help you." If such a savant does move beyond sneer to specifying alleged evidence, the evidence always can be ultimately exposed as a stipulation and not a mind-independent "fact of the matter". Even then the stipulation is usually vulnerable to reasonable dispute. Take Michael's suggested example -- great replication. When "is" something "great replication"?
