Man Makes Chart Attempting To Objectively Codify 'Good' And 'Bad' Art, Gets Widely Dunked On
For as long as there's been art, there have been people attempting to assert that their view of what makes art "good" is better than another's. Some would posit that the ensuing arguments about art are what in fact makes art worthwhile, as humans debate their various worldviews through the catalysts of film, music, television, books, paintings, sculpture, etc.
Thus, when one man decided he'd had enough of all this arguing and decided to list what objectively constitutes "good" art and "bad" art, it was perhaps unsurprising that his take was largely dunked on.
On Sunday, Twitter user Jash Dholani, a writer who appears to have an affinity for classical art and aesthetics, posted a chart in which he attempted to codify what makes art "good" and what makes art "bad."
"The most annoying people in the world love to say there is no objective difference between good art and bad art, so I made a list of 15," he wrote in his contentious post.
According to Dholani, "Good art" "improves mood," "believes in beauty" and "wishes to be canonic" while "Bad art" "makes you feel weird," "spits on beauty" and "wishes to destroy the canon," among other diametrically opposed differences.
The chart took a couple of days to begin spreading on Twitter / X, but once it did, it was widely lambasted. Many read it as aligning with fascist views of art, while others joked the chart itself fit right alongside its definition of "Bad art."
Dohlani has been defiant in the face of the criticism his chart has received, calling his critics "communists with pronouns and mental illness in bio" and tweeting an image of Donald Trump as Pepe the Frog, begging the question of if Dohlani considers that meme "Good art."
Share Pin
LilaBirby
great, now make art with a plant
that's secretly "that plant"add coffee and a table too.
SardonicRainboom
You can celebrate ugliness without spitting on beauty.
Gumshoe
This list has so little to actually do with art that I'm almost sure it was made just as a sort of trolling thing.
Revic
"Bad art is whining, coping, seething, and a waste of time."
Nice. Now we know what kind of art this chart is!
xoxin
Is this dude seriously a writer? What the hell does "sets off upward spiral" even mean? You'd think it's about the emotional effect or something, but that's another point all together.
When I see his drug metaphor, it makes a lot more sense:
"Bulletproof Coffee is a rich, creamy coffee drink filled with healthy fats. This Keto drink (sometimes called butter coffee) is made with coffee, grass-fed butter, and MCT oil."
That drink does sound like something that'd be attractive to hipsters or those in cloistered art circles.
xoxin
The only point I sort of agree with is the "mocks the concept of values" part. And only because it encompasses the "banana taped to the wall" type shit. Dadaism I think it's called?
Nox Lucis
Real question is what does his sixth point even mean? Does he literally mean, "Good art will mention froufrou coffee. Bad art will only mention weed."? What?
Revic
I think he means good art has an effect like coffee, while bad art has an effect like weed. Is this about visual art only? Because I can't think of any visual art, good or bad, that has had either of those effects. Maybe music could, but calling relaxing music bad art would be a bad take beyond bad takes.
view the rest of this conversation →
Salnax
Nowhere does he list anything like technical skill or skilled use of artistic tools. That's the closest thing we've got to "objective" art criteria, but he can't even fit those sorts of things in the Top 15.
:̶.̶|̶:̶;̶
As much as I think we don't have enough art that is positive and sincere instead of ironic, deconstructivist, satirical etc…, gatekeeping art doesn't fix that.
Nox Lucis
Ah, one from the "Good vibes only. Don't make me feel bad or challenge me." crowd. The most boring people on earth.
Rynjin
By this clown's logic this painting counts as bad art lmao
Liam EG
Self-proclaimed intellectuals when I remind them that the adjective objective means "not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts"
Nox Lucis
The greatest point to show how this guy is a stupid MF is how everything else is contradicted by his own 5th point. Stagnation is born of a refusal to embrace complex feelings, inability to challenge the established, and an excessive dedication to codified, acceptable standards. Cultural momentum is born of challenging sentiments, rejection of canon, and breaking from code. The inclusion of this element makes his argument self-refuting, especially against the backdrop of his fixation on artistic precedence rather than innovation.
Revic
Objectivity is rare. MOST writing is subjective by its nature, to varying degrees. And that's fine. An "objective review" for instance would just be a flat, literal description of a piece of media's contents, which wouldn't be very useful for most of the things someone reads reviews for. The mystification of "objectivity" as some enlightened ideal to strive for has just broken some people and led to them struggling to obtain it in matters where it's undesirable or impossible.