I don't want to live in a world where I'm not allowed to say that this is objectively horrific art:
[youtube]AsUS3HJ19mA[/youtube]
Available for booking. I mean if this was my junior high aged daughter I'd be proud as shit but are there just no standards anymore.
Thoreau's post yesterday reminded me of this topic.
Over the years I definitely drifted into the "it's all relative so enjoy whatever floats your boat" camp yet last December I was exposed an inordinate amount to the movie "Love Actually", the current popularity of which has made me seriously reconsider whether society should be concerned about the quality of the art it produces (which of course raises the point of how it's measured). It seems quaint now that 50 years ago we were *very* concerned about the relationship between political system and the quality of art they produce. We've given up on the idea of quality to the extent that such comparisons simply don't make sense anymore. I suppose it's all for the best yet I simply can't let go of the idea that an excellent performance of Beethoven's Grosse Fugue is objectively better art than someone playing the theme to Pirates of the Caribbean with a laser bow in front of a screen with a bunch of stupid effects. I feel like the furthest I can go is that I won't begrudge people enjoying what they enjoy (I certainly have my share of terrible taste), but when people start claiming equivalency there's a certain bridge I can't cross which makes me feel like an irrational snob.