3 ms·
That's a valid aesthetic norm to adopt, and I can see how its a practical one if history and culture strike you as too expansive and disorienting and if you fee
by swatcoder 2y ago
That's a valid aesthetic norm to adopt, and I can see how its a practical one if history and culture strike you as too expansive and disorienting and if you feel like you need a strictly conceptualized aesthetic in first place.
It sure precludes a lot of art that others have found especially stirring, though, and rejects much of what empowers art to be communicative in a social context.
It's valid, but extremely narrow and devaluing, so probably not the norm to expect many artists, patrons, or casual appreciators to adopt for themselves.
- DiscourseFan 2y agoWhat is an artwork if it is not striking? Just because someone tells you you’re supposed to like it? That’s close to navel-gazing. Georg Trakl was frequently referenced by Heidegger and Derrida for just this reason, his poetry is strange, uncomfortable, alienating: you don’t need a degree to feel it.