Not The Onion

11843 readers

560 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world

132

George W. Bush’s Original Paintings Are Making Their Disney Theme Park Debut (people.com)

submitted 4 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

53 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I’m not judging anything. What I’m saying is that works must be judged for their redeeming value in toto against the actions the deeds of the artist. Ie, one must be judged in balance against the other, not simply one or the other in a vacuum.

I’m trying to express my standard for judgement, not making a judgement myself.

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Hmm its an interesting take. I tend to take the approach of evaluating the frameworks individually and and comparing to other artworks based on each framework itself. Obviously the artist themselves are one framework for which you must evaluate but I think trying to compare that to other frames as apposed to other artist themselves is an exercise of the subjective.

[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

The artist isn’t a framework. An artist creates a framework, from which they must eventually be separated (in your wording).

So, once an artist is prolific enough to establish (as you put it) a “framework”, then one can separate the judgement of the “framework” form the individual artist themselves.

Does that make sense?

Edit: if not, maybe I can clarify further

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

Any perspective is a framework I would consider the artist to be a perspective (framework) through which you can view said artwork. You are a framework I'm a framework an artist is a framework it inherently creates subjectivity.

I'm well aware its usually not considered a framework in its own right and often lumped in with contextual or maybe historical but when making a division between the frameworks I find it a useful division to make.