| |
|
I think Jack, and others, have ignored what Tez has since qualified/clarified (not exactly helped by his tone in the first few posts, admittedly - and the Chesterton quote, by the way, is out of context, especially with Gilbert's own views on 'the proles'... he considered himself one of them, for a start).
'Vulgar' is an emotive word, and badly chosen, as Tez admitted. It also has a far greater span of meaning than that so baldly stated by El Fear earlier on... his definition completely ignores any colloquial meaning or context, a context which is perfectly exemplified by the kneejerk responses to the word itself in this thread, which Jack is also guilty of. 'Vulgar' is usually taken to mean that which is beneath the educated audience, hence the vitriol... it's used to denote overuse of swearing, for example (frequent cursing is a sign of an underdeveloped vocabulary, dontcha know, you fucking turdbaskets).
Firstly, Tez is concerned with getting his first novel published, a novel which is by no means elitist or avant garde in the way I would consider those qualities - it's actually very readable and relatively well-paced, with some genuinely horrific elements which made my spine go creepity creep. Of course, as an intelligent writer hoping to have his slightly offbeat work published, he's faced with the current realities of the marketplace, which is a major frustration if you're not Stephen King or John Grisham. I can understand his concerns, as they relate directly to his life... I'm not entirely sure he's phrased the opening posts in a manner that would enable the broad discussion he's after, probably partly because he was venting at the time.
And yes, the 'quality in art' debate is one we've had before - doesn't mean it's not worth having again. We get different viewpoints, rationales, ethos and justifications every time someone new puts their twenty million yen into the discussion. Of course, a search on the board might mean that new posters could read previous threads on the subject, but that's a matter for the individual poster, I think.
But it's ad reductio in the extreme to boil it down to "it only matters what you like." It's not the whole point. If it was, we wouldn't still be having this argument. Go on, try and compare artistic merit in Victoria Beckham's 'autobiography' and The Brothers Karamazov. Is the former even meant to be considered 'art'? According to the press release, probably. But we modern readers of texts are supposed to ignore authorial intent, right? Or not?
I don't think the art debate is quite the one Tez was referring to in the content of his first post, though it's certainly the subject raised by the abstract. I'm gratified that the conversation has moved on to be one worth having - however, I'd expect a better class of initial response in the Head Shop, to be honest, and I'm a little disappointed in Jack Fear. Even if Tez wasn't a mate, I'd have been able to sift the Nirvana from the Nickelback from what he said to respond constructively. But that's just me... Libra, the scales... |
|
|
