Thanks, I appreciate your response. First off, I have to point out that your judging art based on success. You don't believe there is a standard, just personal opinion, so the only thing you have left to judge the goodness/greatness of an art in any way that reaches beyond yourself, is success.
Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson
So conversations like this really shouldn't happen if you're correct that the only thing that should matter to me is what pleases me. Claude Monet is no greater than what I'm scribbling in front of me as I write, neither is Picasso, they are just more successful. On top of that there is no discussion if I think the box I scribbled onto my pad of paper is better art than your or Ansel Adam's photographs. And you can't say it isn't until you take a look at it for yourself.
A lot of people agree with you, no doubt about that. I think this clearly goes against the way we talk about and the way we see the beauty and art around us. For instance, the deep-sea creature - eddie pointed out that a marine biologist might think it more beautiful than a songbird, but this is only because he's studied the creature and sees and understands facets that most people don't. It isn't a toss-up whether or not most people think a vampire squid or an eastern bluebird is prettier, if there was no standard, it should be.
I don't exactly understand what you are saying about a universal standard coming out of individual appreciation. What I was saying is that there is a universal standard that exists outside of ourselves. That makes sense of that fact that we have conversations like this, and some people like stuff and some people don't, but also of the fact that we talk and act like there is a standard naturally. If there was no standard it would be odd to see so many cooking & photography & writing contests.