marycatelli (marycatelli) wrote,

aesthetics is aesthetics

And only aesthetics is aesthetics. 

Which means that only aesthetic considerations affect it.

And that means that:

1.  Historical significance is a moot point.  However ground-breaking a work was, we are allowed to give it a gimlet eye and say, "Nope, that's not a good use of that technique or other thingee."  Or even "That's a crashingly bad piece of work that was running purely on novelty power."  Just because some works are both ground-breaking and masterpieces, and other works are both ground-breaking and competent does not mean that any ground-breaking work must have any inherent goodness.

Young idiots who think the earlier work is the derivative one are, of course, young idiots, but they aren't making an aesthetic claim, only a historical one.

2.  Author's intentions are a moot point.  If you change a book into a movie and alter something because you think it unsuitable for the target audience of children -- if it introduces an aesthetic flaw, you have made the movie worse.  And the same goes for any other agenda. They are not defenses of aesthetic flaws.

grumble, grumble, grump

Tags: aesthetics, rants, writing audience

  • The angel Gabriel from Heaven came

    The angel Gabriel from Heaven came, His wings as drifted snow, his eyes as flame; "All hail," said he, "thou lowly maiden Mary, Most…

  • Let all mortal flesh keep silence

    Let all mortal flesh keep silence, And with fear and trembling stand; Ponder nothing earthly minded, For with blessing in His hand, Christ our God to…

  • I heard the voice of Jesus say

    I heard the voice of Jesus say, "Come unto Me and rest; Lay down, thou weary one, lay down Thy head upon My breast." I came to Jesus as I…

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded