So there's two possibilities, one is that artistic quality is objective and the other subjective If it's objective, then as we learn more about it and we get better over time - new art is better than old art just as new science is more accurate and new technology works betterhttps://twitter.com/iridienne/status/1290750884607954944 …
-
Show this thread
-
If it's subjective, then, well, it's subjective I can like old stuff, you can like new stuff, neither of us is wrong But it will remain an empirical fact that the newer something is, the more currently living people will like it, because it was addressed to their tastes
1 reply 3 retweets 21 likesShow this thread -
Either way, current relevance matters, art gets stale over time, and almost all artistic work is eventually forgotten That's how it's supposed to go ("This too shall pass")
1 reply 1 retweet 14 likesShow this thread -
I think the second POV is truer than the first, but people who hold the first POV and DON'T think that, if objective standards of quality exist, we get objectively better and better over time are assholes
1 reply 0 retweets 14 likesShow this thread -
If you believe in "real, objective truth" about anything and yet you don't believe we learn more over time and are therefore better than our ancestors then what's the fucking point Of anything It's not respect to your elders, it's insulting them by saying their work was wasted
2 replies 3 retweets 26 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @arthur_affect
I just don't think art works like this. there isn't progress in art, though as you say, work of our own day tends to be more meaningful to us. (with some exceptions.)
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nberlat @arthur_affect
I'm gonna agree with this point broadly. And I say that as someone who got into LOADS of fights with his art school teachers over the merits of lots of modern art because I'm way more traditionalist in some of my ideas than others and had a bit of growing to do on the subject.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Well, like I said, I think 2) is much more true than 1) but I bring it up like this because reactionaries who think there is an objective definition of beauty almost always also think we had greater access to it in the past than the present
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @nberlat
Again agreed. My issue was less the idea of "objective" definitions of beauty and more I felt like a lot of modern art was devaluing the craft but that's a whole other set of discussions. That I'm not sure I really enjoy having anymore.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.