From: Please@dont.try   
      
   "Kris Krieger"  wrote in message   
   news:13qg0s3d1lulm4d@corp.supernews.com...   
   > "Michael Bulatovich"  wrote in   
      
   >> I took a couple of courses in aesthetics in school but,   
   >> in the end, after all the education you may have to refine your   
   >> appreciation, and after filtering out all the institutional and   
   >> cultural premises, I'm pretty sure all aesthetic decisions come down   
   >> to this. It's an opinion, and the value of an opinion is politically   
   >> determined.   
   >   
   > How?  By whom?   
      
   Immediately by those politically powerful, who determine what is or isn't   
   'good': taste makers, academics, preists, polititians, critics, etc.   
   Longer term, by a society.   
      
   > So, what, if I don't belong to the "correct" political party, I've no   
   > right to have an opinion...?   
      
   I never said that. That would be silly....Say you hate the Impressionists.   
   You think they can't paint at all. You think they are decadent. That's   
   you're right, so far.   
      
   Say you are an amateur painter yourself. You show up to an auction, say you   
   are very, very rich and want to buy a Monet for $30M because you have way to   
   much money and want to paint over the canvass. The Monet offends you, and   
   you think the world would be a better place without it 'corrupting   
   generations', or whatever. You openly announce your intentions.   
      
   Imagine the 'debate'. It is not inconcievable that a state might even move   
   in and confiscate your canvas before you have a chance to put on your smock   
   on the basis that it is a national treasure, or something like that. The   
   issue has become political because the opposing opinion is very widely held,   
   for whatever reason, and is backed by political power. Your 'right' might no   
   longer be as robust as it was 2 paragraphs up. They might let you think what   
   you want, but they might not let you do what you want. (In another context,   
   they might have exiled you or even burned you alive as a heretic.)   
      
   On an individual level, widespread, culturally shared values are not much   
   different than opinions. There's nothing analytic about them. They are both   
   values, or preferences of one thing over another, but the ones that are   
   deeply and widely held have the political force of the group behind them,   
   which is why I said the 'value' of an opinion is political. In this context,   
   'value' is the political support that the society afford that 'opinion' or   
   value.   
      
   This is a powerful force, on a human timescale. That is why there are   
   several industries out there trying to shape opinions on everything from the   
   marvel of Segway PTs, to what happens to your soul after you die, to the   
   necessity of a genocide. It's really what most 'political' debate is about:   
   How many people can you convince to share your values or opinions?   
      
   You can still hate your Impressionists, as is your right, but that opinion   
   isn't going to have much influence until you have the political power to   
   imposed it on others who disagree. That may happen one day...reversals like   
   this have happened before...look at the Buddhas of Bamiyan, or the paintings   
   of  Bouguereau.   
      
   Of course there are broader time scales where the whole issue becomes quite   
   moot, like the ones I am working with in my exploration project. Geologists   
   throw around "millions" like beads at Mardi Gras.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)