![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
epiphany of obviousness
Apr. 23rd, 2023 05:03 pmI had one of those today.
For the last couple of weeks, I've found myself listening to a lot of rock'n'roll recordings from England in the fifties and early sixties... back when rock was in its infancy, and people were still feeling their way through how to do this thing. And I realize that some of these singers and musicians and songwriters are comparatively crude. But I still enjoy listening to this sutff.
And it occurred to me that, just because there is Better Music® out there that I could be listening to, it doesn't mean I'm wasting my time listening to this instead. There are plenty of reasons to enjoy art besides how accomplished it is. Ultimately those reasons are all subjective, and so what? Heck, have I already forgotten the lessons of seventies punk? That was a deliberate reclamation of the idea that art doesn't need to be The Best® in order to enjoy making it, or to enjoy what someone else has made.
Conversely, something that is demonstrably Well Made® is not necessarily enjoyable, either. Like I said, it's all subjective. It doesn't even really matter if we can identify for ourselves what it is that we like about art, just as long as we like it. People like what they like. And we need to let them like what they like.
Then I got thinking about my own work, and how quick I am to see its shortcomings, and how many better artists and writers there are out there.
And so what? People can still like what I make anyway. Some of them actually do, and I can't say they're wrong to. I could be a crude fifties English rocker for someone out there — not The Best®, but someone still finds something in it to like, for whatever reason.
I keep losing sight of this, and I need to not lose sight of it.
For the last couple of weeks, I've found myself listening to a lot of rock'n'roll recordings from England in the fifties and early sixties... back when rock was in its infancy, and people were still feeling their way through how to do this thing. And I realize that some of these singers and musicians and songwriters are comparatively crude. But I still enjoy listening to this sutff.
And it occurred to me that, just because there is Better Music® out there that I could be listening to, it doesn't mean I'm wasting my time listening to this instead. There are plenty of reasons to enjoy art besides how accomplished it is. Ultimately those reasons are all subjective, and so what? Heck, have I already forgotten the lessons of seventies punk? That was a deliberate reclamation of the idea that art doesn't need to be The Best® in order to enjoy making it, or to enjoy what someone else has made.
Conversely, something that is demonstrably Well Made® is not necessarily enjoyable, either. Like I said, it's all subjective. It doesn't even really matter if we can identify for ourselves what it is that we like about art, just as long as we like it. People like what they like. And we need to let them like what they like.
Then I got thinking about my own work, and how quick I am to see its shortcomings, and how many better artists and writers there are out there.
And so what? People can still like what I make anyway. Some of them actually do, and I can't say they're wrong to. I could be a crude fifties English rocker for someone out there — not The Best®, but someone still finds something in it to like, for whatever reason.
I keep losing sight of this, and I need to not lose sight of it.
