(February 15, 2016 at 3:32 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Well, I think if someone criticizes another person who opens himself up to critique using such vague and useless terms then the critic should show, in one form or another, what he thinks is wrong with the offering, and how the critic's idea of poetry finds its expression.
Everyone's a Monday-morning quarterback. It takes skill to perform.
I'm not confusing "good" poetry with technical prowess, either. My opinion on art is that if it moves the reader/viewer/listener to feel the emotions the artist felt at the moment of creation, then the work is a success on that level. Judging art on technical criteria is like judging a piece of machinery on its beauty.
Quote:My opinion on art is that if it moves the reader/viewer/listener to feel the emotions the artist felt at the moment of creation, then the work is a success on that level.
Yep, and that is all it takes right there. Which is why I am no fan of critics. I think it is ok to have your favorites sure, and it is also ok to not like something personally. But art really is in the eyes of the viewer and that changes from person to person.
There was a brief show on Bravo called something like "The Next Great Artist", and the judge on it said what I knew for a long time, "Art is simply that which works".
