Assertion: artist's art | /r/HasProperty | good
Facets:
value: inherently
type: DEGREE
value: namely
type: DEGREE
value: chiefly
type: DEGREE
Source sentences:
text: To ask what art is good for is not exactly the same as asking what its purpose is.
text: What art is "good for" arises from its being an end in itself, or more accurately, the embodiment of many different things that are valuable for their own sakes.
text: And that is what art is chiefly good for: namely, that by its relationship with its audience it can make something move in the realm of thought and emotion, where such movement is life.
text: So if you discard taste, you also have to discard the idea of art being good, and artists being good at making it.
text: If good art is art that interests its audience, then when you talk about art being good, you also have to say for what audience.
text: And yet you can see how great a hold "taste is subjective" has even in the art world by how nervous it makes people to talk about art being good or bad.
text: I don't have any illusions that being able to talk about art being good or bad will cause the people who talk about it to have anything more useful to say.
text: It is a myth that art is inherently good simply because it is