Are There Any Valid Criticisms? (aka Kalessin's Rant)

[littlemanpoet]

It is true, Aiwendil, that art will always have some independence from the artist because every observer of a work of art will bring to it a unique perspective and background; thus the interaction between the observer and the work of art is necessarily independent of the artist. Nevertheless, the artist as originator of the work will supply parameters of possible modes of interaction simply by virtue of what is put into a work of art. For example, Dr. Seuss books and Tolkien's poetry are appreciated in different ways; both are art, both are within the same genre called poetry; but the mountain streams into which they dipped their buckets were quite different and no matter how independent a given reader might be from Tolkien's or Seuss's original intent, some responses will simply fall outside possibility. I would venture to say the Seuss strove for seriousness level 4 whereas Tolkien achieved level 6. To sum up, I think both the intention and the result play a part.

I did try to emphasize that I consider one level of seriousness in no way inferior to any other, except in precisely the seriousness of intent of the artist. Perhaps I'm boiling a pot that doesn't hold water, but I don't think so. I would say that in each higher level the lower are incorporated, such that of course Tolkien wrote for personal satisfaction and self-expression, but went beyond that to evolution of consciousness. In the same way I am trying like the dickens to get better at levels 4 and 5 and still write for self-expression and personal satisfaction - though sometimes the discipline required to write at levels 4 & 5 require a delay in the gratification in levels 1 & 2.

I think the distinction between personal satisfaction and self-expression is valid. Again, level 2 subsumes level 1. It is possible to write for personal satisfaction without attempting something that is aesthetically pleasing, even to oneself. Think of a prepubescent girl's diary entries, for example, which may sometimes be inadvertently loaded [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] with fantasy. Strictly level 1. My own first drafts often are in this vein when I am digging something that seems powerful out of my subconsciousness; it is still guilelessly bad as art, but is essential in the process of subcreation for me.

Nor does self-expression instantly involve other people. I may write something that no-one else ever sees.

As to good plot and character development, the operative word is "good". There may be plot and character development at lower levels, but it may lack consistency, it may be lacking at all, there may be too much character development at the expense of plot or vice versa. As to a person strivingfor good plot and character development, this is precisely why I call these levels of seriousness. At levels 1 - 3 the writer is serious about certain things, but does not yet care so much about good plot and character development so as to focus her or his energies on that aspect of writing.

Please do not think that I'm in love with my own categorizations. If they don't hold water, I would love to be shown how. If they can be improved upon, that would be great, too.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply and the kudos on the analogy - it felt right.