>>1335401>this is simply not what I want to see>what I want to seeas i said before, there is no point in arguing about personal tastes
i simply cannot know why (You) like XYZ (unless you tell me)
>of courceperhaps "originality" doesn't translate in your language that well. what i meant is that every artist has his own unique voice (so to speak) which he uses to create new works (but not necessarily radical, groundbreaking ones). vivaldi and bach are both from the baroque era, but they sound distinct from each other. bach literally copied some of vivaldi's violin concerti, but he changed instrumentation to include organ or harpsichord, which dramatically alters the texture of the work. also, bach took melodies written 200 years before him by martin luther and weaved them into his own compositions, going beyond what he did with vivaldi's. he transformed something old into something new, though it may not be 100% original
>universal criteriaread about aesthetics, the branch of philosophy that is concerned with beauty and taste, as well as the philosophy of art
tartarkiewicz - 6 conditions for art presentation:
>beauty>form>representation>reproduction of reality>artistic expression >innovationxie he - 6 principles of chinese painting:
>creativity, or "spirit resonance"particularly hard to translate, but i think this is the artist putting his spirit/energy into his work
>structural use of brush>proper representation of objects>specific coloration of those objects>good composition>transmission of the old masters by copying themthere's probably more of these about the other mediums, i can't be bothered to find them. hope it gives you an idea
