So the other day I had some random thoughts floating around my brain about art. Particularly good art and bad art. Was there such a thing? At one point I had thought it was a very obvious concept but after thinking and reading about art for so long now, the argument becomes very real and relevant. Indeed it is an argument as old as art itself.
Today I have a different approach to my logic and it usually drives me up the wall because every topic I delve into always comes back to subjectivity and semantics. Inevitably it all depends on how you view the question and the world (is the glass half full or half empty?). Due to this logic; as the thoughts were bubbling around my brain I realized it was very clear to me... The answer is no there is no such thing as good art or bad art. There is art you like and art you don't like. No one can truly say whether or not it is good or bad.
The argument had evolved in my brain, into a new bigger monster. The question is now not about good or bad art, but about craft/skill. It is
possible to talk about craft in terms of good and bad, and most people (generally speaking) can identify whether an artists craft is good or bad. But does the level of craft even matter when an artist removes him/herself from the physical act of creating a work of art? When the artist chooses to have others create the work for them, or create art through other means that do not measure in level of craft, but perhaps level of intent or purpose for executing the work?
This is where I am at for now. If I think of anything else to add or if you have anything to say on the subject please feel free to share.
Oh art! What a perplexingly frustrating subject...