LeatherMint on Nostr: I agree with all of this. He puts enough caviats like "*most* modern art..." that im ...
I agree with all of this. He puts enough caviats like "*most* modern art..." that im confident I can agree with all this.
His overall point is that art used to require talent to be appreciated at the highest level. Talent that requires work and time. Now what is being appreciated is the cleverness of the joke or the shock value. Which may make sense in some cases but probably not in most cases.
If there wasn't that much cheap money flowing around I don't think this specific type of art would see that much money flowing towards it.
I feel like he steelman them enough by saying their value is in the intellectual interpretation rather than the beauty reached by sheer mastery. I don't think those people would disagree themselves.
The only thing is that saifedean add the opinion that it is a cheap intellectual interpretation and I would tend to agree in most cases. But im also not a professional and may not have seen that the vast majority of modern art are exceptional in their meaning.
His overall point is that art used to require talent to be appreciated at the highest level. Talent that requires work and time. Now what is being appreciated is the cleverness of the joke or the shock value. Which may make sense in some cases but probably not in most cases.
If there wasn't that much cheap money flowing around I don't think this specific type of art would see that much money flowing towards it.
I feel like he steelman them enough by saying their value is in the intellectual interpretation rather than the beauty reached by sheer mastery. I don't think those people would disagree themselves.
The only thing is that saifedean add the opinion that it is a cheap intellectual interpretation and I would tend to agree in most cases. But im also not a professional and may not have seen that the vast majority of modern art are exceptional in their meaning.