Art for What’s Sake, VI: The Effect of Art
“You’re getting a little carried away. Next you’ll be telling us there are wrong flavors of ice cream or saying “no meatballs with spaghetti.” Yeah, I saw the movie.”
“You’re getting a little carried away. Next you’ll be telling us there are wrong flavors of ice cream or saying “no meatballs with spaghetti.” Yeah, I saw the movie.”
How could we possibly talk about movies as art, if we don’t agree on what art is. It would be the same as talking about movies without knowing what a movie is. And, if everything depends on how we feel or on what gives us pleasure, then there is no basis for discussion.
You’re making an exception for country music, because you happen to like it. Are you seriously suggesting that a good song lyric is on par with great poetry?”
The American ruling class and its frontmen in the media are indulging in one of their periodic orgies of anxiety. How can a known terrorist have been allowed to enter the United States, make his way to Texas, and terrorize a synagogue?
At this point, however, we are not yet prepared to deal with the question of whether or not beauty is in the eye of the beholder or whether value is subjective or objective.
This poem is one of Swift’s masterpieces. His savage wit, his ruthless dissection of human motives, his arrogance–and his self-contempt–all combine to produce a masterful satire.
An untechnical conversation on the meaning of art, set in a Middle American saloon with pop music blasting over the speakers.
To most of us living in postmodern times, these Germanic customs seem crude and dangerous, and the reluctance to consider the moral questions is a fatal weakness: