[Vasu]

It is partly because they are not quantifiable that I do not like them. I suppose it is impossible to objectively name any single work of art as "better" or "best", as the vagaries of individual opinions always play a role, as you say, it misses the point. But what then, is the point? How does expressing yourself in poetry or prose uplift your spirit? How does drawing a picture of a human body circumscribed by a circle provide you with great ecstasy? How does it matter whether what you said is direct or described with a great variety of metaphors, allusions or anything? If it was a contest of literary expertise, it would seem alright (Is this spelling right? For some reason my spellcheck is underlining "alright"). But it's not. It's rather a means of "enriching humanity", "uplifting the soul" and other such vague terms.

You deliver a speech. Why? Because you feel strongly about an issue, and wish to let others know that and also to let them know why you feel strongly about the issue. It was not done with an intention of personal pleasure.

And you're right. I don't like the Declaration of Independence, but that's because of the frequent references it makes to "the Creator" or "God", which are not definable objectively, but that's a different matter.


EDIT: (Ralath posted before I could finish)

I intend to say more worthy of impression to me. Not to others, as I cannot speak for others. Therefore it is subjective, but only to me. And the moment it is subjective to only a single person, it ceases to be subjective.


Law is meant to be objective. The moment it becomes subjective and open to interpretation, you get loopholes, "ways-out" and other such things.