/lit/ - Literature

This is art.

>>19919322
These threads invariably suffer from the fact that nobody even bothers with an attempt to define "art" in the first place, nevermind what makes it "high" or "low." Of course this very much reflects commonplace usage of the word, which is generally applied purely by fuzzy intuition and an "I know it when I see it" approach. Hence the eternally fruitless arguments over whether modern art should be considered art at all. Everyone is working off their own private definition of the term. Reasoned discussion is rendered impossible. And why should shitposters on /lit/ succeed where even serious scholars have failed?

>>17345533
Look at this and tell me art hasn't become degenerate.