>When someone can think up an argument to convince a Harry Potter fan that they should really judge Bach's music as more beautiful, pleasing, of higher artistic value etc. than Harry Potter, then I'm curious.
Such matters are not decided by arguments, the same way flat earth society members are not won by arguments (they heard them all anyway).
It's up to each person to make the effort to grow their understanding, which requires study and self-development.
>I think there's a reason why even die-hard Adorno "fans" have given up trying to argue why jazz music is so bad.
Yes, because mediocre commercial art prevailed in the end, and the kind of cultural development of bourgeois society declined.
Ironically for a good while jazz took a different route from the earlier kind of jazz Adorno criticised, much closer to those ideals of art. So it's more like Jazz post-50s went closer to Adorno than the other way around...
Such matters are not decided by arguments, the same way flat earth society members are not won by arguments (they heard them all anyway).
It's up to each person to make the effort to grow their understanding, which requires study and self-development.
>I think there's a reason why even die-hard Adorno "fans" have given up trying to argue why jazz music is so bad.
Yes, because mediocre commercial art prevailed in the end, and the kind of cultural development of bourgeois society declined.
Ironically for a good while jazz took a different route from the earlier kind of jazz Adorno criticised, much closer to those ideals of art. So it's more like Jazz post-50s went closer to Adorno than the other way around...