Fascinating discussion! Compliments to all. Is there a more sublime art form than the transcendental forum post?
I thought I’d jump in here since it looks like everyone’s ready to scrawl their names on a peace settlement and quit the field, even though we still haven’t got to Kalessin’s alternative to the “primacy of subjective evaluation”. I’m curious to know whether you think there is a set of objective criteria against which all art (or at least, all literature) may be measured and ranked. And since folks like Aiwendil (and myself, I might add) seem likely to disagree with your criteria and your rankings, aren’t your “objective” standards really just your version of subjective evaluation? In which case you’ve put yourself in the curiously postmodern position of admiring work based on its reference to external values, even though you dislike the intrinsic merits of the work itself.
That is to say, even the judgment of “what is good for me” is just as subjective as any other. Your spinach and ice cream analogy, though vivid, breaks down. The relative dietary values of spinach and ice cream are quantifiable and provable, whereas one man’s literary spinach is another man’s literary ice cream is another man’s literary dog food.
Incidentally, I disagree with the assertion that sports, and even chess, do not occasionally rise to the level of art. Anyone who witnessed some of Michael Jordan’s more memorable games (for instance, his Game 5 performance against Utah in the finals) or watched this year’s women’s figure skating finals knows what I mean. I might also add that McDonald’s has definitely raised the “French fry” to the level of high art.
|