The formal error in
SpectralJulianIsNotDead's logical argument is begging the question,
petitio principii. He establishes the circular reasoning with the half-question, half-statement
"Even though we can never know for sure what the artist's true intention was?"
If intention is not revealed by action, (bear in mind that some intentions require more extensive investigation than others & that some actions are not what they at first appear to be) then how are we as humans (who experience the world primarily empirically) to understand the world around us?
He knows this to be true himself, but thought that his topic may engender some debate about the nature of art as a by-product.
On a related note, just because astrophysics proves that our measurement of time is arbitrary, one can still not deny that astrophysics proves that time is a dimension save maybe on some metaphysical level where time & eternity bleed into one.
His argument would be somewhat better served if he had chosen Mariah Carey instead of Britney Spears, because Mariah supposedly writes her own lyrics.
jheii, there are plenty of valid points of differentiation between high & low art, between fine & graphic art & so forth. It's just that the line has been blurred by self-serving artists & a self-serving art crowd and also a myriad of other societal determinants in consumer culture.
And I don't have the time either. I'm determined to watch Sunday Night Football.