Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtle91
So, I have two pictures on my wall. 1) the Mona Lisa (original, of course...) and 2) my sons first crayon drawing at 13 months.
Which one do I ENJOY more?? Which one is considered "real art" ??
Too many people here are arguing that they are offended that "the elitists" are telling them that their son's crayon drawing isn't real art.... Hate to break it to you folks....it's not...not in the same manner as is defined when you say "literature"...
Who cares what Ms LeGuin's personal history is? Or that she may, or may not, have had a poor day in her life?? Ridiculous...
Read her article.... She is complaining about how the current BS system is meaningless (or not) in determining if a book is "good". She never says you aren't allowed to enjoy your books. She never says your books are bad... I would think there are too many other things in life that you can be offended about instead of trying to force her article into the shape of an attack on you.
Cheers,
|
What is "real art"? Who decides? What is the judgement based on? What makes that basis valid?
Those are hard and real questions. (Personally, I rate Jackson Pollack below the childhood drawing that inspired Lennon's
Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, but that is my personal taste.)
One
genre writer stated that his goal was "to write about the human heart in conflict with itself". That writer made more money and got more awards that Ms. LeGuin in his lifetime career.
Ms. LeGuin is handicapped as a writer by a lack of experience in <all> aspects of the human condition. I say that, having read a large amount of her output. It is limited in worldview, and limited in understanding the great mess of conflicting realities that make up being human. I don't value how fancy the words are used or how pretty they're strung together, if that means you are not describing humans are they are.
Frankly, James Branch Cabell, has her beat hollow, as literature, but he never publicly woofed about how his later work didn't sell...