Is there such thing as "objectively bad art"?
90 votes
No. All art has objective merits.
No. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Yes, probably, but who am I judge?
Yes. Some things people draw are just utter crap.

Deviation Actions

maria-jaujou's avatar
By
Published:
Comments5
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
KatanaSoul's avatar
I think it depends on what exactly you´re judging. "Art", if you ask me, is to general to talk about. There is bad technique, boring idea etc., and that by itself can be judged. You can say wether someone can or can not do solid crosshatching.
But a piece of art as a whole is pretty hard to judge.
Mattsma's avatar
There are some famous painters whose pieces are being sold for millions of dollars and I don't see why. I think it is in the eye of the beholder. What I consider wonderful gets two thumbs down by the next guy :D
bewildered's avatar
...Yes, and there isn't an artist out there who hasn't produced at least a little of it ;) Some days I think my entire life's work is utter crap... (don't worry, I get over it quickly ;) )
wendyf's avatar
Absolutely yes, some things should never see the light of day. The trick is recognising them before anyone else sees them :)...though, even utter rubbish may have some merit if something positive is learned from it!
Niagargoyle's avatar
I like Scott McCloud's definition of art: anything that does not directly contribute to extending one's own life or the species. From that definition, the only people who aren't artists are people who know nothing beyond food and sex. I guess that there are some bad artists on DA after all.