>>24443847
>Why?
sub·jec·tive
/səbˈjektiv/
adjective
1. based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.

Would you, perhaps, agree that whether something is "insightful" is a matter of perspective? Likewise, whether prose is 'good' or the writing techniques employed are 'good'? The verbiage you used yourself—"excellent"—should have made you stop typing and realize, oh shit, that's by definition subjective.
Is a claim like "this book was insightful" or "had good prose" at all comparable to a truly objective statement such as "the apple is red"?
/lit/ is so pathetic these days. Why even try to make this nonsensical claim that art is objective? Why do you want art to be objective? Grow a pair and say "This is a masterpiece and if you disagree I see you as a drooling retard with no taste".
When did stemlords infest this board? That's the only explanation I can think of for you retards who need desperately to classify art as "objectively good" or "objectively bad", as if that makes any sense whatsoever

Back | Go to board

Board:

/lit/

Thread:

who decides which books deserve the title of "classic"? most classic books that I've read were extremely boring and pointless, and some…