Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
(How do we know) what is "good art"? (Listening to art…
(How do we know) what is "good art"?
Listening to art critics' opinions: based on well-defined standards, trained, etc.
Art critics have the advantage of being constantly exposed to art, so they have a lot of prior knowledge/experience to draw on.
The more you know, the more you are able to distance yourself from your personal reaction, and focus more on other ways of knowing.
BUT -- should we be critical/skeptical of the standards adopted by these critics? Who gets to decide what the standards are?
After all, critics are also people, with their own biases and distinct perspectives.
Critics' judgments should, ideally, be objective.
We can say that critics are "special," in this respect -- we expect more from them, and in return their opinions have more value.
Critical methods allow for greater objectivity and less reliance on personal views/experience.
This ideal may be impossible to reach.
We as individuals make judgments about what good art is based on our "visceral reactions"
To a certain extent, these reactions are shaped by shared knowledge and the judgments of a community (or critics)
There may be a "shared knowledge" perspective on what is good, and a "personal knowledge" perspective as well. These may overlap but they may also be very different.
Popularity may be a criterion for good work, but just because it is popular, doesn't mean it is good.
Emotional reactions
Will good work always make us feel good? Or at least make us feel something?
How "shareable" are these emotional reactions?
Does loving a work really mean that it is good? Can't a work be good even if we don't like?
Memory: does good work need to be memorable?
Arguably -- points of view will be different.
This is an individual, personal criterion, right?
What do we usually mean by "good"? Something that successfully accomplishes its function. Is there a similar way of understanding what "good art" is -- something that "serves its function"?
This might allow us to be more objective, because we could say that a good work is a work that does what it sets out to do.
The difficulty is in establishing what the artist sought to do. Moreover, it has the implication of suggesting that popular art forms like reggaeton are good, so long as they get the dancefloor moving!!!