February 2, 201016 yr ...BUT What makes literature GOOD LITERATURE... to YOU...Is it well-written? Does it follow the rules of good literature, or break them in an interesting way? ie. Is the plot interesting? Is it well-structured: Does it have a good arc to it, or if taking an unconventional approach does it work? Is it engaging? Is it relevant? Does it have something new and/or good to say? Does it make the reader think? Are the characters (whether flat or rounded, static or dynamic) well developed? Do they serve the plot well? Do they seem real? If they are caricatures, are they entertaining, and do the fulfill their intended roles well? Is the dialogue well-written? How is the setting handled? How does the narration impact everything? Is it the right tone for the story? Are the words well-chosen? If it's non-fiction, (like a textbook or scientific journal) how well does it present the information, and what is it's intended audience? Is the language well-chosen? Does it get the point across? Is it engaging? Is the structure logical and easy to follow?
February 2, 201016 yr In the same way, the writings of Amanda McKittrick Ros may be the worst literature in the history of English literature (look her up), but even bad literature is still literature. she's horrible.
February 2, 201016 yr Ok, taking the art part of the argument, this is art. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_of_Fire Some of the haters (of which I am one) may say that it isn't art, but it is. In the original context, it was interesting too, apparently. It was in a whole room full of weird graphically bold paintings at expo '67 in Montreal. It kind of fits with the whole 60's aesthetic. Then in the late 80's, it was purchased by our national art gallery for nearly two million dollars. And everyone has been debating it ever since. Because it's a board with 3 stripes on it that cost millions. It is stupid art. You could argue that it's bad art. But it will never stop being art no matter how much you hate it. 1. AAlmost nothing annoys me more than people who hate on modern or minimalist art. You get the same lines over and over "what?!?! I could draw that!!!" So many people are under the impression that for art to be good, it must be difficult. They see painting as no different than any other profession like being an athlete or a lawyer, and get infuriated when they see unimpressive drawings put on a pedestal. And they're so blinded by this contempt for simplicity that they forget why art is made in the first place. Art is not a competition, it's expression. You don't go to the Tate Modern to approve of the amount of hardwork that went into each display, you go there to experience and be personally affected by what these artists have made, and I've been more impacted standing in front of a painting with only two colors than I have been by most portrait galleries I've been to. rant over. :P In the same way, the writings of Amanda McKittrick Ros may be the worst literature in the history of English literature (look her up), but even bad literature is still literature. Goodnight Moon or Great Expectations, it has words in a book. They even tell stories. Therefore they are literature. the distinction between this and minimalist art though, comes down to authorial intent. The purpose, or intent of, say, a brian eno ambient piece is much more modest than that of a symphony. They're apples and oranges, and are meant to be different things, and affect the audience in different ways. One might say the only direct way of judging art is by how well it furfills the artist's intent for it. Amelia Bedelia is meant to be nothing more than a children's book, a kooning art display may simply try to create a childish curiousity in the viewer, while something by Amanda Ros may try to be a great, serious novel, and fail miserably.
February 2, 201016 yr Author You're fucking delusional. :( Despite its lame special effects and stuff Star Trek actually deals with morally gray issues, or at least the original series does, I haven't watched much of the rest coz it's lamer. Whereas Star Wars is more well-done technically and possibly has better acting (but not in all cases... specially the prequels) but deals with moralistic black & white things... Luke is good, Darth is evil, Luke triumphs over evil by pew-pewing the Death Star... I mean it's a good story and the original three films are good, I just prefer Star Trek, I think.
February 2, 201016 yr ... rant over. :P I love well-done minimalism. I have a background in graphic design and developed a thing for it during that time. Although that particular piece gets on my nerves, I have no problem with someone hanging it in a gallery and calling it art. Because it is. What I have a problem with is someone hanging a pricetag on it and calling it great art.
February 2, 201016 yr :( Despite its lame special effects and stuff Star Trek actually deals with morally gray issues, or at least the original series does, I haven't watched much of the rest coz it's lamer. Whereas Star Wars is more well-done technically and possibly has better acting (but not in all cases... specially the prequels) but deals with moralistic black & white things... Luke is good, Darth is evil, Luke triumphs over evil by pew-pewing the Death Star... I mean it's a good story and the original three films are good, I just prefer Star Trek, I think. But Star Wars has Natalie Portman, R2D2, Darth Vader and pew pew :( I agree with bad acting though, Hayden Christensen is baaaad. edit: AND CHEWBACCAAAAA
February 2, 201016 yr I love well-done minimalism. I have a background in graphic design and developed a thing for it during that time. Although that particular piece gets on my nerves, I have no problem with someone hanging it in a gallery and calling it art. Because it is. What I have a problem with is someone hanging a pricetag on it and calling it great art. I hear ya, even I get annoyed at seeing stuff like that selling for thousands, but then again, it usually is more about the fame and influence of the artist than the composition itself.
February 2, 201016 yr Author But Star Wars has Natalie Portman, R2D2, Darth Vader and pew pew :( I agree with bad acting though, Hayden Christensen is baaaad. edit: AND CHEWBACCAAAAA Oooh well I love R2D2, but C3PO is sort of annoying, and I love Chewbacca, but I love Spock better, so. :nice: I love how no threads in CPing can remain on topic for more than a page or two. Isn't it just terrifitastic
February 2, 201016 yr Oooh well I love R2D2, but C3PO is sort of annoying, and I love Chewbacca, but I love Spock better, so. :nice: I love how no threads in CPing can remain on topic for more than a page or two. Isn't it just terrifitastic Forgive me for turning this into a Star Wars/Star Trek thing. I shall go kill myself in a basement :( I always thought C3PO is gay.
February 2, 201016 yr :( I CAN CHANGE!!! :bigcry::bigcry::bigcry: LOLZ, I just never understood that philosophy/literature related crap. I'm a science person :(
February 2, 201016 yr Author Forgive me for turning this into a Star Wars/Star Trek thing. I shall go kill myself in a basement :( I always thought C3PO is gay. He totally is, he has boatloads of unreciprocated love for R2 :P
February 2, 201016 yr He totally is, he has boatloads of unreciprocated love for R2 :P I think R2 got Padme pregnant, not Anakin :awesome:
February 2, 201016 yr LOLZ, I just never understood that philosophy/literature related crap. I'm a science person :( yeah...not to go intellectual on you again, but I think the main difference betwen math/science people and linguistics/humanities people is that math/science people generally like said subjects because they enjoy the certainty and stability of building on concrete, factual information, while stuff like literature and philosophy seem abstract because they have so many unresolvable variables. while... Humanities people see math and science as abstract because algebraic equations don't seem all that relevant to them personally, and they enjoy philosophy and art because it addresses questions that seem most important to them, like the nature of human life and how to approach it... Neither is fundamentally better than the other, its just the impression I've gotten from talking to people with different majors.
February 2, 201016 yr Author I think R2 got Padme pregnant, not Anakin :awesome: HAHAHAHA There's probably a fanfiction for that somewhere.
February 2, 201016 yr Author yeah...not to go intellectual on you again, but I think the main difference betwen math/science people and linguistics/humanities people is that math/science people generally like said subjects because they enjoy the certainty and stability of building on concrete, factual information, while stuff like literature and philosophy seem abstract because they have so many unresolvable variables. while... Humanities people see math and science as abstract because algebraic equations don't seem all that relevant to them personally, and they enjoy philosophy and art because it addresses questions that seem most important to them, like the nature of human life and how to approach it... Neither is fundamentally better than the other, its just the impression I've gotten from talking to people with different majors. Mathematics can be an art form, I think.
February 2, 201016 yr I'm going to look for that, would be lovely to read something like: Padme: But R2, this is forbidden, Anakin loves me.. R2: ~ Padme: NO, STOP! Don't leave :( R2: ~.. Padme: Just kiss me R2 <3
February 2, 201016 yr Author Well hell, whadaya know, I searched for "Romance" fics on fanfiction.net with R2D2 and Padme... absolutely no dice :( LET'S RITE ONE :cheesy:
February 2, 201016 yr Mathematics can be an art form, I think. I would disagree. At least, not in the way one understands arts like literature, film, music and poetry.
Create an account or sign in to comment