Sign In

Post #1433831

Parent topic
Objectivity in art
Link to post in topic
Date created
2-Jun-2021, 4:40 AM

This is definitely a yes and no question, in my opinion. Maybe I can try to give an example to illustrate my mindset.

Beauty is a lot like art, in the sense that it’s objectivity is often argued over. “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder” and all.

Beauty Standards definitely exist, but what those standards are change with trends, countries and cultures. So, yes, someone could be objectively beautiful based on a certain set of beauty standards, and those standards may even have a psychological effect on our subjective tastes, but those standards aren’t some objective universal truth. There is really no such thing as objective truth when it comes to art and beauty.

Artists have learned techniques to manipulate our emotions through whatever medium they work with, and I believe you can judge art through the artist’s execution and/or subversion of those techniques. But I think our judgements are still bound by generalization and shifting standards. So I don’t think it is fair to say something is objectively better than something else unless you state by what standards you’re rating this thing by.

But I think a lot of times when a person tries to argue that something is objectively better than something else, they’re typically judging them by a set of unspoken standards. So I guess the question becomes whether or not they are aware of the standards they’re judging this thing by?