Quality in the arts

[DodosAreDead]

Yes, very much. 

In fact, I think that what you write here may constitute a kind of criterion by which we can describe the quality of a work. For example, a story which rigidly adheres to the rules of its genre, to the point where there are no surprises, might well deserve less attention. A work which prompts many strong and suggestive interpretations is likely a wonderful work. 

In my opinion, the Book of Job is this way, among many others. Its "real meaning" is ambiguous, if there even is a real meaning. But the text plus all the interpretations we have down the years forms a wonderful thing to spend time on. 

A book in which the author's meaning is rigidly clear, which we must only interpret in one way, might well be too simple. 

Well, in a way, I guess we could quantify based on the average number of ways each person interprets the art, but that's prone to participant variables. A lot of people (including myself, to some extent) look at art superficially. 

I don't mean to indicate that there will be an eternal and universal hierarchy of qualities which will lead us to indisputable numerical judgments. There are any number of qualities we look for and wonderful works may have different combinations of these. I can argue that a 19th century novel shows me how real people in those days thought about their lives. And I can argue that Flaubert's Temptation of St. Anthony is wonderful even though none of the characters is the least bit realistic. 

Still, there are articulable reasons as to why these works are worth our time. It is far more than just "I like what I like and you like what you like and it's all equal." 

I don't mean to say that every single thing about art is relative, as you've proven with the 19th century novel example. But for one work of art to definitively come out on top, there need to be several such. And even then, everyone has the right to say "but for some inexplicable reason, THIS work of art appeals to me far more than this", and no one can argue with that. 
Define "wonderful".
Worth our time is again relative. It simply depends on how much value each person gleans from that art.

I'd say it is true for art, with the obvious difference that tensile strength can be measured and quantified. In a novel, if superiority is to be judged on only one criterion, then judgments would be simpler. But you are right that we don't judge them by only one criterion, because there are other qualities we value. Thank goodness, good artworks are more complicated than that.

There are varying criteria for string too, though, right? If you're wrapping a birthday present, you use string that's pretty. If you're tying up your girlfriend for special playtime, you use jute string that's too rough to slip and tighten up the knots uncomfortably -- tensile strength wouldn't be so important, unless you're doing the whole ceiling suspension thing. And that's kind of advanced.

---

I didn't mean to say that string can be judged on just one criterion and art can't be, but that there are many quantifiable ways to judge string. although some, such as 'pretty' will still be relative, of course. 

Bold mine: that makes all the difference.