To provide a different point of view, his discussion on quality was for me one of the best takeaways from the book. As a bad artist, I've always been both anno

To provide a different point of view, his discussion on quality was for me one of the best takeaways from the book. As a bad artist, I've always been both annoyed and fascinated by the fact that no one can tell you what "good" art is. ZAMM presents for me a good definition (good art is art with good quality, where "quality" is further explored in the book) that one can actually use, and has been my to-do measure ever since. Of course, the author himself discards it at some point, but I find his concept of "quality as the relation between the objective and the subjective" to be a great first try. And we all know that perfect is enemy of the good anyway.