When is something "pretentious"?

[AceBoogie]

Hi,

As someone who enjoys reading, watching movies, etc, I wonder what gives someone the right to call a work "pretentious", be it a movie, book, etc. I believe there is some subjectivity to this. What may be pretentious for someone, may not be for the author or someone else. Now, I am not the elitist who believes only a very specific pool of books and movies can be called art, even excluding other mediums such as manga, videogames, anime, etc. I believe every medium has its own characteristics and can be called art by its own merits regardless of its form.

I just dont want to write something that will be called pretentious by the majority of people. Maybe by a few is acceptable though. Its not like I care what people say, but I just dont want to be treated like a naive kid writing a book.

To consider a piece of art pretentious is certainly subjective. Art is subjective. But... I tend to agree that the term 'art' is too loosely applied in today's age... to anything anyone has created through any medium. Sure, your splash of different colored paints on a white canvas could technically fall under the definition of art... but is it quality art? Do an artist's technique, style and skill have no place in determining the quality of a particular piece or body of works? Many people act as if just smashing some clay together, forming some odd shapes and calling it "a social commentary on the human struggle" makes it art. Once again, you may, technically, be right, but I think your clay mound of dog turds looks like, well, dog turds. When it comes to paintings/drawings I tend to value something that not only expresses a true human emotion but also embraces technique and style. Throwing a line of red paint next to a line of blue paint and calling it 'Diversity' doesn't make you an artist.

Art is subjective... but in my opinion many things others consider art are garbage to me. When it comes to literature I tend to gravitate towards the classic authors... Tolstoy, Dovstoyevsky, Dumas, Charles Dickens, Hemingway, Steinbeck... even Kerouac... then again I'm a bit of a book snob. I have read some works of some modern authors and honestly I think many of the books in today's library, so to speak, will go down as some of the great pieces of literature in history. But I tend to prefer the classics because it is what I've found that I most enjoy... the simplicity with which most of these writers combine their words is insanely amazing when you consider how much detail and emotion they convey through them. When I read Alexandre Dumas' 'The Count of Monte Cristo' I am literally, at some points, on the verge of tears because of how he pieces the story together in such an emotionally riveting way. That is good writing. I feel like too many writers now try way too hard to emulate this simple style that so many of the early authors used and it comes off as gimmicky and phony.

All that said... I wouldn't worry about coming off as pretentious. Just write and love what you write. If you don't love it... erase it and start over. If it's pretentious, oh well. Good writing is good writing, pretentious or not.