You're constantly missing the point. Artistic merit has nothing to do with your feelings about a particular work or how it was made. That is your personal preference or opinion, whatever. People decide on artistic merit organically as a collective.
They seem to not get that they are judging other people, not the work itself, when the say something has no artistic merit.
At the same time they say that:
- They would look down on an art history PhD who tries to tell them there's more to it
- They think that people who think that work isn't "shit" are idiots
- They are glad others are frustrated with their attitude, because other people seeing something in what they think is "shit" frustrates hem
This is way beyond missing the point. They are taking offense at others having opinions on an artwork, and take a difference of opinion as a personal attack that they are glad to retaliate to with a bona-fide, actual personal attack.
They also feel entitled to an explanation, which they demand, and when people point them in the direction of what they could learn, they say that "oh, you want to get something out of me" (as if learning gives to anyone else).
Their basis is: "If I see it a certain way, then everyone else should see it that way, unless they are incredibly stupid or are talking in bad faith". So when other people don't provide a justification for seeing things differently, they are dismissed as stupid, or perceived as hostile.
Let's say, this pattern of behavior is well-studied, and has a name.
romwell|1 year ago
At the same time they say that:
- They would look down on an art history PhD who tries to tell them there's more to it
- They think that people who think that work isn't "shit" are idiots
- They are glad others are frustrated with their attitude, because other people seeing something in what they think is "shit" frustrates hem
This is way beyond missing the point. They are taking offense at others having opinions on an artwork, and take a difference of opinion as a personal attack that they are glad to retaliate to with a bona-fide, actual personal attack.
They also feel entitled to an explanation, which they demand, and when people point them in the direction of what they could learn, they say that "oh, you want to get something out of me" (as if learning gives to anyone else).
Their basis is: "If I see it a certain way, then everyone else should see it that way, unless they are incredibly stupid or are talking in bad faith". So when other people don't provide a justification for seeing things differently, they are dismissed as stupid, or perceived as hostile.
Let's say, this pattern of behavior is well-studied, and has a name.
(I grew up with a parent who behaves in this way)