How do we measure the quality of art?

>>8766545
Simple:

You make a representative poll. If most people like it, it's objectively good.

>>8766545
aesthetic value. you either get it or you dont.

>measure the quality
Not how it works.

Mostly, use your sense perception. What is novel to you, might not be to someone else. Some are numbed in areas others aren't.

But the whole of art, the whole set of effects, though distributed differently toward men and cultures, is an eternal unity.

Today, you have to be careful with "entertainment" vs. "art."

Art is designed to challenge your senses and to awake you.
Entertainment, even if it may be ruddier and sweeter to eat, exploits and perpetuates your weaknesses, or a whole cultural weakness. It identifies your area of numbness, or a collective area of numbness, and proceeds to operating there much without your awareness.

Many craftsmen end up as propagandists, advertisers,...

>>8766569
Damn I didn't realize the earth could adjust its shape to the opinion of the majority of people living on it.
Quite amazing.

>>8766545
By the gravity of its intrinsic meaning to the viewer/reader/spectator.

>>8766586
are you reverse baiting? ppl on this board dont seem real internet savvy

>>8766545
Variation upon schema.

For an artform to evolve, original images can't always be copied slavishly They should be adjusted according to new technical possibilities, changing storytelling fashions, political ideas, emotional trends, etc.

Technology has been a key element in the changing creative possibilities available to artists, but deep down the questions of the fundamentals of art (or art in the medium an artist expresses themselves in) remain remarkably consistent.

>>8766545
Art is subjective, the question us do you like it?

>>8766684
dirty filthy relativist DIE DIE DIE DIE DI E

That's not how it works, anon. It's useless to try to "come up" (from where?) some rule with which to measure art. Each context will have some things they value in their art. The thing to evaluate is not art itself, but our appreciation of it, as it is now. That is to say, we are attracted to some art and repelled by others, we build our art references in some way or another, different people turn to different artworks at different times, and if that is so, what words can we use to describe each one of those paths? In other words, what political situation, ideological motivation, aesthetic pleasure moves us towards what kind of art? Where does it come from and where does it go? Theory of art is made of that. Even the arguments that favours one art over the other is mostly an argument about what logical path that particular person takes to reject some and accept other artistic endeavours. To put it simply, it's not about "we have these values, so we ought to like this artwork", it is "we like this artwork, but why?"

Read Valery, Benjamin, Panofsky, Gombrich, Argan, Ranciere, Berger...

File: Ugh.png (259KB, 641x279px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 641x279px

>>8766684

See vid related:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0c63SOwFOwk

>>8766736

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Dl5Id8CHh0

>>8766736
Sometimes the emperor is naked. Sometimes you really are just too stupid to see it. It may be best to stay quiet in those cases.

>>8766737
>>8766736
>Roger Scruton

fuck off

>>8766736
>>8766737
>Roger Scruton

fuck on

>>8766736
>>8766737
Have you watched Penn & Teller on religion? Due they the best.

When the world finally wakes up we shall all jack off to Mona Lisa in our private space shuttles.

>>8766545
each medium and style of art has its own criteria

for example you don't measure a gothic cathedral by the same things as an expressionist painting

File: _88046531_ap_scars.jpg (48KB, 976x549px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 976x549px

You just count the number of tits in the image/film/novel, etc. One point for each boob, 1/2 point if no visible nipple. That's how Harold Bloom does it.

>>8766545
>How do we measure the quality of art
You ask me my opinion.

>>8766569
Genuinely burst in laughter reading this.

>measure

Nice thread, Yaldabaoth.

>>8766545
All measures are arbitrary and subjective

>>8766569
Lmao

>>8766545

There is only one way of assessing art, by the Test if time.