Rainer Deyke wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Paul Graham argues that relativity of taste is just a fad:
http://www.paulgraham.com/taste.html
His entire argument seems to hinge on the idea that the difference
between a good artist and a bad artist is that the better artist has
better taste. Which is complete and utter bullshit. The good artist is
good because he has the skill to better express his taste, not because
his taste itself is superior. He can create things that are more
beautiful (a technical skill), but only for his own sense of beauty.
I'm not sure. Actually to be frank I completely disagree. I'm trained in
music and my father is an architect and painter; I see/hear plenty of
work by artists that technically are very skilled but have poor taste.
Besides, modern technology has democratized many aspects of creative
work, but I'm almost afraid to factor that extra argument in because it
might be attacked and evidence is powerful enough without it.
Andrei
