/lit/ - Literature

Yes. Hamlet and In Search of Lost Time evoke more complex emotions than Harry Potter, unless you're a brainlet. Most people cannot spot exceptional anything and just revert to comfort.

Objectivity in human perception of objects doesnt exsist because there is no such thing as being un-biased. By merely existing we establish grounds, perceptions, and ideas exclusive to our train of thought which we then contrast with the world around us, aka we create a vision of something only we ourselves as individuals can see

>>12952173
Yes. True art:
https://youtu.be/JmTvwOc0wI0

>>12952173
uh
kids like sugar
producing sugar is pretty easily not the highest aim of mankind - I hope I don't need to demonstrate that....?
of course a great chef could pull of some artistry and blow the example, but you get my initial point, right? I mean, sometimes a lollipop and a blow job are just as shattering the Sistine...

question A and question B don't really fit. try again.

>>12952192

>>12952192
yes, but two hot dogs are more than one

>>12952173
>Is there an objective way to view an art work?
Yes. it's just analyzing it from the intended subject. You can get stuff out of art by viewing though incorrect lens, but the meaning is distinct from the artist and simply something you came up with yourself using the art as inspiration. You can obviously just be wrong in your analysis.

>>12952202
Very good response, and I mean this sincerely.

>>12952217
I believe this technique is called SUBJECTIVITY

>>12952173
No. The only way to achieve a pure analysis of art is to clearly define the standard by which you analyze it. Because these standards can change, it is as this >>12952222 anon said, subjective.

>>12952206
Art is not math

>>12952173
No. But the closest we're ever going to come is a consensus among experts, and the consensus among experts is Hamlet is better than HP.

>>12952222
I just explained the role of subjectivity and how it's distinct from objective analysis. Objective analysis needs to be viewed from the creators lens and can then be judged outside it. Subjective analysis isn't relevant to the art itself and it used appropriately when it takes the form of inspiration rather than critique.

Modern art is beautiful.
https://youtu.be/VdQY7BusJNU
Prove me wrong.

>>12952221
It's my standard response to relativism.

>>12952273
well, then potato.

>>12952238
two red smudges on a canvas is different than one.

fuck you.

>>12952273
Pseuds taking the low hanging fruit/bait is exhausting on 4chan. it's nice when stuff like that gets ignored or treated with the lack of seriousness it deserves.

>>12952267
you have to provide an argument first

>>12952330
How is it not beautiful?

>>12952699
im sorry, were you saying pop music is modern art?

>>12952718
What is it then? Alien time travel shit?

>>12952173
Nuance. Harry Potter is pretty direct in what it wants one to imagine/feel and if you are to ruminate deeper, that's fine. Deeper works provide arguments, insights, etc. that allow the mind to be provoked. I think it was Kant who called it the "quickening," which allows one's mind to actually play with complex ideas. Read his work on Aesthetics but it's more related to music and paintings than lit.

The swordsman that defeats his opponent, is he not objectively better at swordsmanship?

Depends on what the art is for. You don't judge all sports equally do you? You have to judge them individually within their purpose. Harry Potter and Hamlet are not the same sport. You can compare Twilight with Harry Potter, but not Hamlet.