Of course expert opinion matters. It got Socrates killed. The Oracle had the audacity to assert that Socrates had wisdom because he knew he knew nothing. Socrates had consulted the experts and soon realized they knew nothing. Socrates had the advantage of knowing what the experts didn’t. But this kind of knowledge will get you killed so it is best to admit that expert opinion does matter if you wish to stay aliveIf you think that 'expert" opinion doesn't matter, try competing for gigs with those whom expert musicians consider a superior musician. You soon find out that post-modernism is a game for theoreticians.
Nick_A wrote:Classic examples are the Sphinx, the Cathedral of Notre Dame, and The Last Supper by Leonardo da Vinci. They are all based on objective principles we are only beginning to understand.
))) Most of these are exactly the art of your "Great Beast". It's exactly why I say that the GB is not all bad.
No, The Sphinx and the Cathedral of Notre Dame exist in the world as well as the Great pyramid. They have relationships built into them which didn’t come from the Beast but from conscious influences or esoteric schools within the Beast which the Beast is unconcerned with. They may be meaningless to most but are important for those within the Great Beast but not a slave to it so are in the process of evolving from its confines
As a secularist the word “quality” has only a subjective meaning for you. Objective quality is not a concept you will have any respect for. At best it is only associated with technique. Art is a means for expressing emotional quality a person can experience and compare with their normal emotional states. A person can sense how emotionally ignorant they are. This humility is part of the beginning of awakening to reality you deny. You are representative of what I call a spirit killing influence. Quality in art must be rejected as snobbish. A person is part of the Great Beast, nothing more nothing less. The Beast and its experts will define objective quality and objective art as characteristic of the whims of the Beast. I oppose the spirit killers and support those helping the young to experience objective quality which is a natural inclination of the soul. The experience can come through ideas, art, and sensory experience of a certain quality while developing the ability for conscious attention. Spirit killers must oppose these experiences since they threaten the supremacy of the Beast and its self glorification. If too many people begin to experience that the emperor has no clothes, the empire is threatened. It cannot be allowed. They threaten the youth of Athens and like Socrates must be eliminated.Sometimes, Nicholas, you are as deep as a puddle, so caught up with the argument that actual reality is ignored. Who here cares if something is "old fashioned" or not? Anyone?? Art can provide both artifice and authenticity, from popularity-seeking to soul searching, the profane to the inspirational. Artists balance expression and impression.
Why go to the trouble of defining and trying to nail down the word "art"? In everyday communication the conventional definitions will tend to get the point across most smoothly.
Why gatekeep the term? Snobbery and elitism (aka insecurity)? Reviewers and middlemen keeping themselves employed or dealers' affiliates talking down the competition? In truth it's all art. Just because something is "art" doesn't mean it is good art, ie. satisfying, interesting, pleasing, amusing, inspiring, affecting, etc.
In truth, "art" is such a broad term that we can put any spin on it that we please. "Art", as noted by Condor above, includes the overlapping fields of fine art, commercial art, pop art, naive art and the artistry that passionate practitioners of any field apply to their efforts.
Arguments often happen when people try to define heavily overlapped arenas; it often involves the unwarranted exclusion of legitimate players in a field, eg. claims that splatter art can never be art, that discordant music is not music, etc.
I find it interesting that people respect quality in intellectual communication. Without a certain quality nothing can be understood intellectually. Without quality in communication It is just BS. Sometimes BS is all that is wanted. If a man is trying to coax a woman into bed, BS is far more important than quality of communication.
But for some reason it is normal to reject objective emotional quality much less what makes it possible. That is why blind morality and the now famous political correctness has replaced the human potential for objective conscience as an attribute of the human soul. Is it any wonder that the silliest things are called art and considered insulting to call them expressions.