/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16295225]

I’ve asked this a few times before but I never got a serious response. Is there any way to say that a work of literature or art is superior to another? Is it possible to go beyond the “that's just your opinion man”.

[Anonymous No.16295233]

sure, by defining a clear set of parameters by which you'll do the comparison

[Anonymous No.16295237]

>>16295233
What would a set of parameters be that everyone can agree with? I don't think that exists.

[Anonymous No.16295246]

>>16295225
mods please ban op for more than 3 days so he doesnt come back we are tired of reporting

[Anonymous No.16295283]

>>16295246
What?

[Anonymous No.16295734]

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aesthetic-judgment/
Read this

[Anonymous No.16296367]

>>16295734
I've read it already it doesn't really answer the question in any substantive way.

[Anonymous No.16296425]

>>16295225
Well, there are certains things that could indicate the quality of a novel, like how the plot is built, the deepth of the characters, the use of the language, beauty.

[Anonymous No.16296433]

>>16296425
How can you measure that in a way where someone can't say it's actually good you just don't understand it or say something like "different works have different uses so you can't use the same measurements"

[Anonymous No.16296443]

>>16296433
That's the whole point of the philosophy of aesthetics.

[Anonymous No.16296453]

>>16296443
I've read it but it's all shit from the 17th century. None if it gives any arguments against the postmodern approach of anything and everything is equal.

[Anonymous No.16296473]

>>16296453
Altough, there's some things that are persistent about aesthetics, but even that is debatable to a certain point.

[Anonymous No.16296491]

>>16296453
For depth of character you could use an archetype system. You could develop this archetype to fundamental definitions then develop a archetype character development sorta like Eric Ericsson does. To underlie that you would need a good analytic/synthetic system which can automatically chart the development of them. Of course the archetypes would have a lot in common in terms of character growth. This would be a task but it's not impossible.

With language or themes you could do the same.

I'm sure you know but anytime there is a question of relative values or conflict on one order, then that means a more fundamental order must be concerned with until you reach a point you agree on.

Anyways it's possible anon and anyone with the interest can do it.

[Anonymous No.16296505]

>>16295225
For novels and stories, prose quality is the only key metric. It could probably be automated to some extent.

[Anonymous No.16296513]

>>16295225
Check out the work of Jesús G. Maestro

[Anonymous No.16296696]

>>16295225
The Boater was truly the best of all hats.

[Anonymous No.16296710]

>>16295225
rank your kino by sincerity anons

[Anonymous No.16296735]

>>16295225
In the end it's all about how good it makes you feel.
Knowing the rules and amount of effort it takes to create works of art is obviously one thing that can raise your appreciation of works of art but the rules themselves aren't a standard for good art.
"High art" are just things that makes people who knows the rules and context feel good.
"Low brow art" are things which makes people who don't know any of the rules or context feel good but not the ones who knows the rules and the context.

[Anonymous No.16297537]

>>16295225
idk consensus opinion prolly

[Anonymous No.16297584]

>>16295237
Whoever holds a gun shall be the parameter

[Anonymous No.16297746]

>>16296453
you sound like an ignorant faggot
>anything and everything is equal
if you are really stupid enough to believe this you'll enjoy rereading Mr Whoopsie Goes To Town