Originally Posted by elphenor

your stance is basically that the point of Art is to immediately look "cool, nice, unique" etc.

well there's a movement for that, though you may still dislike it

Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien

There is only one bright spot and that is the growing habit of disgruntled men of dynamiting factories and power-stations; I hope that, encouraged now as ‘patriotism’, may remain a habit! But it won’t do any good, if it is not universal.

Originally Posted by jwb

It's not that arbitrary.

Originally Posted by elphenor

your stance is basically that the point of Art is to immediately look "cool, nice, unique" etc.

well there's a movement for that, though you may still dislike it

Originally Posted by Frownland

It is entirely arbitrary but thanks for your input.

Also, art ain't a contest so the notion of "failure" is irrelevant to the conversation.

Originally Posted by jwb

It reminds me a lot of the crap they had on display at the art gallery I went to with the ex.

Originally Posted by jwb

It's not that arbitrary.

In terms of painting, it's visual the same way music is audio. You shouldn't need an explanation for why a song is good to like it. Either it sounds good or it doesn't. Same way you shouldn't need an explanation for why a painting is actually brilliant.

It's a visual medium. If the visual doesn't capture it then the painting failed do what it's supposed to.

Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien

There is only one bright spot and that is the growing habit of disgruntled men of dynamiting factories and power-stations; I hope that, encouraged now as ‘patriotism’, may remain a habit! But it won’t do any good, if it is not universal.

Originally Posted by jwb

I mean is no more arbitrary than any other way if judging art.

Originally Posted by The Batlord

I mean nothing is that simple. The signed urinal isn't anything to look at but as an attack on the art world's entrenched ego it's great. But in that case the context isn't so much an explanation as it is that if you weren't there at the time you wouldn't be aware of how the presentation of the piece was itself the art and so you'd need it explained.

Originally Posted by jwb

nah it should just be moving in some way based merely on the actual piece

You're right though I don't like that picture

It reminds me a lot of the crap they had on display at the art gallery I went to with the ex.

Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien

There is only one bright spot and that is the growing habit of disgruntled men of dynamiting factories and power-stations; I hope that, encouraged now as ‘patriotism’, may remain a habit! But it won’t do any good, if it is not universal.

Originally Posted by Frownland

My whole point is that standards for art are arbitrary, so yes any method of judging art based on any such standards are arbitrary.