Has art jumped the shark after WWI?

[thesummerqueen]

And I'm not a huge film buff, but I adore reading and photography. Is it really fair to judge something too much when it's not even something you like?

Unless it's 50 Shades of Grey. Then judge the fuck out of it.

---

Are you saying people don't perform live anymore because you can listen to it over a speaker? You need to visit my city - people play on the streets for the hell of it. They play in halls for the performance. It's definitely not destroyed.

What I am saying is that it is much more difficult than in prior eras to make your living as a musician. Busking on street corners won't give you Robert Plant's private jet.

I don't think it's any better or worse. I would say that unless you can pull out numbers, the same amount - or maybe more, considering you can market to more people now - of people turn out famous than they did 20 - or 200 - years ago.

So it appears because of revolutionary technological innovations in communication and information technology. These are closely held by fewer persons making individually more money. As far as music making being more widespread in actuality, I expect it only appears so because the relevant records are not available for say, the late 19th century in which poetry reading, hymn singing, private recitals and concerts were wide spread community activities.

You're right - I should have said we have more access to more music now than we ever did.

Again, the technology gives you access to a larger percentage of the extant examples of realistic portraiture. That this shows a real greater prevalence does not necessarily follow.

I didn't say it was a greater prevalence. I was responding to you saying it was dead.