you are agruing my case for me.
i am saying that we both have different perspecitives on all "art" type events. we cant discuss art unless we note this perspecitive discrepency. for perspecitves near our own, its interesting to see whats arround some corners which another person can see. for perspectives very different from our own, we get frustrated becuase we cant see what the other person is discribing.
vla, we can both look at a thing that is most certainly "art" in the popular definition: a painting or something. i might say "i think this is good art." and you might say "i think this art sucks." and we now know our opinions on the piece. we might then discuss the why of these opinions.
but when i say "i like this piece of art" and you reply "what art? i see nothing artistic about it. all i see is trash." it makes for a bit of un-necessary tention, and certainly isnt helping us understand one another's view points.
so, we should just agree that things are good art and then say that we feel its good art ot bad art. not in the absolute sence (i dont think there can be one) as you seem to think i ment. rather, we state our views and let it be known what we think.
final point, i chose The Matrix as a film example for 2 reasons: it did well in the box office, which means that a lot of people got it. i am not saying that a movie doing well means its "good art" (Home Alone... ugth), but it dose bespeak good directing, as its a story embraced by the popular imagination. i also chose The Matrix becuase its ubiquitisness. had i cited something more obcure, i run the risk of you not knowing what im talking about, which would defeat the purpose of me talking.
but i might be wrong. |