What are the ways to make your poems spread to the audience?

[Ralath]

I point out those bold words because they include appreciating a matter.

But you can't just bold those words and say that's what a critic does. That's unfair. You can't be selective and only choose the words that suit your purposes. Yes, a critic does find the merit in art. But that is only a part of their job. That's like saying what a principal does is bad because all he does is discipline students.

..hrm... Hegel abstraction.

Then why bother with public displays of art?

Just because there is a public display doesn't mean there is necessarily a "winner" and a "loser." Speeches--public displays of speech. But comparing Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech with Abraham Lincoln's "Gettysburg Address"--which is the winner and which is the loser? Or documents? Which is the winner--the Declaration of Independence or the Magna Carta?

[Vasu]

But you can't just bold those words and say that's what a critic does. That's unfair. You can't be selective and only choose the words that suit your purposes. Yes, a critic does find the merit in art. But that is only a part of their job. That's like saying what a principal does is bad because all he does is discipline students.

..hrm... Hegel abstraction.

Yes, but what I feel is that a majority of the critics will be gushing out in pleasure because of the social standing of the artist in question. they'll be pretty much "flamed" in a manner of speaking, if they differ. At the very least, they aren't taken seriously.

Just because there is a public display doesn't mean there is necessarily a "winner" and a "loser." Speeches--public displays of speech. But comparing Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech with Abraham Lincoln's "Gettysburg Address"--which is the winner and which is the loser? Or documents? Which is the winner--the Declaration of Independence or the Magna Carta?

You really want to know my answer on this one? I think the speech that instigated a greater percentage of people towards the cause it was supporting was the better speech. I don't know which one it was in this case.

[Ralath]

Yes, but what I feel is that a majority of the critics will be gushing out in pleasure because of the social standing of the artist in question. they'll be pretty much "flamed" in a manner of speaking, if they differ. At the very least, they aren't taken seriously.

Critics usually don't care about the "social standing" of the artist. Or they shouldn't, at any rate.

And they wouldn't get flamed, they would just have people who strongly disagree with them.

You really want to know my answer on this one? I think the speech that instigated a greater percentage of people towards the cause it was supporting was the better speech. I don't know which one it was in this case.

But that's not measurable. And even if it were measurable, it wouldn't stand the test of time because you can't measure how many people were swayed by the Gettysburg Address today.

And you definitely can't measure documents that way.

[Vasu]

Then I'd go with whichever cause seemed more worthy of appreciation.

And documents aren't art. They're simple statements of facts. You can't ask - Which facts are truer?

[Hraesvelg]

If you can't read the US Declaration of Independence and see that it is also a work of art, then I'm sorry for you. You have this almost obsessive desire to quantify and label subjective experiences. Which is "better"? (Note, I'm not asking which you prefer. I'm asking which is, objectively, as you want to label everything, better). A sunrise or a sunset? A daisy or an orchid? Michelangelo's Pieta or Jackson Pollock's One: Number 31, 1950? How can one even begin to quantify such things? It is impossible and misses the point completely.

Even you say "Then I'd go with whichever cause seemed more worthy of appreciation." This raises the question...seems to whom? To you? To me? To Ralath? It is an unquantifiable term, "seems."

[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.

[Hraesvelg]

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.

That is the very definition of subjectivity. I don't understand what point you're trying to make there.

Have you never read a poem, heard a song, or even watched a movie and felt your emotions soar? Felt the creators joy or sorrow? Been stirred to strive for something better for yourself or others? Do you derive no benefit from any artistic endeavor? I genuinely hope this is not the case.

[Ralath]

Then I'd go with whichever cause seemed more worthy of appreciation.

Aha. You would say the better one is "more worthy of appreciation." That's a vague term if I ever heard one. How do you measure which is more worthy of appreciation? I would say you would have to measure it subjectively. I think that's a definition of art--subjectively measuring the worth of appreciation.

And documents aren't art. They're simple statements of facts. You can't ask - Which facts are truer?

I would definitely say the Declaration of Independence is art. It's not just a simple statement of fact. It's pretty subjective in itself. Other documents might be a little drier and might lay down law, but... law might be an art form as well.

But that's not really relevant.


On a different tact, I would say visual art is just an amalgamation of facts, viewed subjectively.

[Leesa]

Heres a poem:

I like stupid things
omg look! waffle kings!

I see dead things
ah!! each one of them sings!

I've never liked mustard
its color is a retard!!

Goodbye and Farewell
I will go hide back in my shell.

Yay me XD