[artcol]

Сообщение от Stanislavski

I think it's just a label.

Yes, no, no label. Study of mass culture, art and other issues of society in the West attaches great importance - for obvious reasons. There's all laid out, the transmission mode. This is our point of return for moving forward - the avant-garde, but there has long been all chewed and 50 years. So Western scholars in matters of codification can be trusted.

Сообщение от Stanislavski

In this connection the question arises, what is - an abstraction? And what is her attitude. and that - no? However, we did respond in this topic.

Briefly my point of view - here.
By definition, the objective of art:

"The difference between subjective and objective art consists in the fact that in objective art the artist is really" works ", ie doing what is going to do, puts into his work the ideas and feelings that are willing to invest in it. And the action of the artworks to people is absolutely certain: they will take (of course, each according to his level), the same ideas, same feelings, namely - the ones that the artist wanted them to pass. Neither in the works nor in the experiences of objective art there is nothing accidental.

"In subjective art everything is accidental. As I said earlier, here the artist did not create, he has" something is created. "This means that it is in the power of ideas, thoughts and feelings, which he does not understand and over which has no power . They run them and are embodied in different forms. And when they accidentally took one form or another, this form just as accidentally turns on the person some effect depending on his moods, tastes, habits and nature of hypnosis, by which he lives, and so on. There is nothing constant, nothing is certain. In objective art there is nothing indefinite. "

and further

... There is a man's being number one, who lives instincts and feelings, is being number two man, so to speak, being sentimental, emotional, human, human being is number three, being a rationalist, a man of the theoretical mind, and so on. It is quite clear why knowledge should not be far from being. Man number one, two or three - and the reason of his being - can not find the knowledge of man number four, five and above. And what would you get, it will explain this in its own way, downplaying any idea before. the level at which there is myself.

"The same order of division into seven categories should be applied to everything that belongs to the man. There is art number one, that is the art of man number one, imitation and copying, crudely primitive and sensual, such as music and dances of primitive peoples. There art number two - sentimental art, art is number three, intelligent and far-fetched, there must be also an art room four, five and so on.