Quote:
Originally posted by MrPeanut
To facilitate understanding and foster discussion that allows people to potentially see things from a different perspective they might not have otherwise, which ultimately allows us to better understand each other and the world in which we live.
Obviously, the more convincing/thought-out argument you make the more prone others will be to understand and appreciate your judgment whether or not they necessarily identify with it themselves, but I don't think you have to be able to articulate a logical basis for your reaction.
I think it's generally understood when it comes to art that any statement which evaluates a piece of work as "good"/"bad" or "better"/"worse in comparison to others simply constitutes a personal value judgement which can't be right or wrong. I'd say criticism seeks to rationalize our visceral reaction, and while the process is beneficial that should be kept in mind.
|
Well, yes, I agree, but what I mean is basically the bolded part - I think anyone is more willing to give credibility to "Katy Perry is better than The Beatles because [solid argument]" than to "Katy Perry is just better than The Beatles". You don't need to rationalize your taste, but you make more of a point if you do and you can actually ignite an interesting discussion from that.
And **** you make great arguments.
