RegularJoan

"Composition"? But doesn't composition imply a conscious and thoughtful mental process?

Yes. Okay. But the criteria by which you call that performance "beautiful" are yours; it's you who decides that there's an harmony in that performance that allows you to define it as "beautiful." And isn't simply giving the judgment "beautiful" a form of criticism? And don't you apply the judgment of "beautiful" by following the rules of taste, which, although hard to quantify, are still rules, criteria, and thus structures? Moreover, do you think that such a "beautiful" performance has an harmony that comes from some romantic, unquantifiable genius, or wouldn't it be more accurate to think that it was achieved through some mental process (call it "action"), rule, technique??

I have the penis, waiting for a response.

a question, sir, I have a penis, but what the fuck is art to you? Are you an artist? Nooo??? Then what the fuck do you care about defending art?

Listen, art is not for the masses (masses? See? You're talking like a Marxist!). Art is for oneself, art is that moment of sublime unattainability, art is the unconscious abandonment since you are only aware in unawareness, just as there is no happiness in being unhappy. Then, inspiration, the spark you mention, comes exclusively from the system, from the context in which you live; inspiration does not arise from nothing, nothing arises from nothing. We are condemned to the "Moloch" you mention, we are condemned to the structure because we are linguistic animals and language is structure whether you like it or not, my dear. Quoting others is not pure citationism; rather, it is objectivism because the unconscious is language, right? So, the unconscious and everything ascribed to it is also structure, right? Right? And at this point, even inspiration, as unconscious as it may be, is and will remain part of the structure that you continue to revile; inspiration and structure call out to each other! And then you who critique the "critics": isn't that also a form of "critiquing"? Are you not also critiquing?? You are in a total paradox, and if there’s something you cannot talk about, namely inspiration which is, as you say, an "imponderable act," then you must remain silent.

yawn. when you finish saying nothing to your nothing, let me know.

Art has never claimed to have a social function: these are talks for pseudo-Marxists...

"You talk about structures, about how to do something, when instead the greatest works of art arise from the unthinkability of the act" ----> understanding the structures and the "how-to-do-things" is the indispensable process for comprehending the mechanics that, even unconsciously, lie behind the work of art. If you don't understand how the tools (cameras, guitars, etc.) that allow you to create the work of art function, what the hell do you need inspiration for? "Genius" and "ingenuity" are nothing without practical skill, just as "praxis" and "poiesis" are two inseparable moments of human "doing." What critics do is the same work that artists do, with different purposes, of course, but the work is always the same, and both act in the name of themselves and for the love of "artistic beauty."

"The spark of inspiration is something that cannot be subjected to the cloistered views of little professors either by trade or pastime" ----> Friend, you know we are part of a "hypertext" and therefore everything that precedes us and surrounds us culturally influences us unconsciously, thus "inspiration" is anything but a spark, rather something pondered that lies within a structure? The structure is language, music is language, Renznor, therefore, could also have been indirectly influenced by Foetus... I'm just rambling, but on the other hand, I've been talking to myself for a lifetime. I don't speak, I am spoken.

Unthinkability of the act? I have a penis, but do you think you're the new Carmelo Bene?? No, because, you see, certain strokes of genius I’ve only heard from him... Are you going to pull out the historic phrase that “to create masterpieces, one must be a masterpiece”? And then, giving a 4 or a 5 to an album may be pointless, but it's born from the unpredictability of taste rules: The beautiful-in-itself does not exist.