Re:The social obligation to be bad at things
by the_af on Thursday June 11, 2020 @03:56PM
(#23492739)
Yes, of course, it's always "to me". I don't wish to stop other people from liking it, or set fire to the museum that displays it. I wish we didn't have to be this careful about language.
Note I will, however, make a mental judgment of someone who finds "Fountain" very moving or noteworthy. Again, this is my personal judgment and I think I'm entitled to it.
edit:
> "It's not for me right now"
This has definitely happened to me, but with books and movies.
Re:The social obligation to be bad at things
by grasshopperpurp on Friday June 12, 2020 @06:25AM
(#23497795)
>I wish we didn't have to be this careful about language.
I didn't mean to say you do. I was talking about perspective, because it impacts how we experience things and can help or undermine our ability to enjoy and understand.
>This has definitely happened to me, but with books and movies.
Same - also happens a lot with music.
Re:The social obligation to be bad at things
by throwaway_pdp09 on Thursday June 11, 2020 @07:19PM
(#23494244)
Your post is saying something roughly parallel to what I've been saying in my other, rather less tolerant posts. It's a good description.
>I "know" it's worthless to me.
So long as one understands the "to me" is implicit, and so long as one understands that POV to be one of countless POV's, I don't see any issue with criticism.
For myself, if something doesn't work, and I see that it's not the work of a novice, I tend to default to, "It's not for me right now," rather than, "It's garbage." I can still discuss the reasons it doesn't work, but I find this perspective to be more helpful. It makes me more curious about the opinions of people who like it, which gives me more access to more perspectives. When something doesn't work for me, I want to know why it works for others. I don't mean this to come off as a game of semantics.