Good Art

The good-art is a fib. Chelsea means more and less each day. People take themselves very seriously. Very seriously. I take myself seriously, as I am sure others do also, but there's got to be some kind of humility somewhere. The idealisms of good or appropriate or fitting art are usually accompanied by so much pre-determined baggage, that the art isn't regarded so much as that which came before it. A purely empirical methodology of classification is unrelated, many say, incalculable. When several people are together and they talk of good art, they are talking of something before it, which didn't really come, because it wasn't like that when it was. Bach is unimaginably different to us now than it was to them before us. This is a contributing factor to the reason that Salieri was a noted musician in Mozart's time and Telemann was somehow considered an all-out genius when Bach was considered a light-weight, a lowly-one. Unfortunately, I think that often we disregard that which is and pretend to regard that which isn't. This all leads to a missing of what I (though I don't really exist) call real art. The point isn't recognition, no matter how much I may feel it is. Good (notice, no quotation-marks) art is epitomized by an appreciation for recognition while allowing for ultimate freedom in expression beyond that possibility of recognition and acceptance. -Thomas