I would say that the situation you described above is about Tolstoy's argument that well-communicated art (perhaps interchangeable in his theory for "good art") is very infectious. Now, what happened in your scenario was discussed in class on Friday, and Johnson tried to make a mathematical expression explaining the situation, which in turn ended up turning infectiousness into a proportion of successful communications over the number of communications that were attempted, I.e. The number of times the work was viewed/heard.
With this spirit I would argue that the art would need more viewers and more judgments before it's status can be declared either way.
No comments:
Post a Comment