|
|
|
|
|
|
by nayroclade
34 days ago
|
|
|
The point is that "part" of the appreciation appears here to be all of the appreciation. Yes, the context of who created a piece of art will have an affect on how you interpret it. But if the question of who/what created it can literally flip your interpretation between "it's genius" and "it's garbage", then that's the only thing you care about. All the actual characteristics of the thing itself are irrelevant. And if literally the only thing that matters about art is who created it, what exactly is the point of art? |
|
|