Why does it have to be a binary "good" or "bad"? That seems to be a false dichotomy.
Why does it have to be a binary "good" or "bad"? That seems to be a false dichotomy.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
https://www.dw.com/en/controversial-...t-101/a-966560
Back to the question of Art and how Art can define the soul, morality and identify of a culture-society. No different than technology, Art can be used for the betterment of humanity and the human condition or destructive and self centric goals and agenda of highly privileged and entitled individuals.
There was a time when "Art" was effectively "married" to religion. Consider the motivations and reasons why Stain Glass were a "thing" in Western European churches.
Bernice
Maybe someone else brought it up, but when I started all this, I didn't frame it as good vs bad. Good, less good, less less good, very good, very very good, ...
Continuing like that, we can get at least countably many "steps" of good.
I'll work on a way to describe it as a continuous, rather than discrete, spectrum.
The aesthetic quest (awareness of beauty and other human senses) brings us to ethical realizations (Kierkegard - a kindred spirit). Artistic endeavor (creativity) is the expression of realized ethical standards. Is pursuit of an aesthetic life “good”? I would say it is necessary.
I like a photograph with an interesting or unique perspective that might reveal something about the artist. Also a photograph that captures something that would have gone by unnoticed or unappreciated. Combine that with a beautiful photographic medium like carbon print on glass, or even just silver gelatin on nice paper, and it's a winner!
Bookmarks