> What's crap about them?
It is impossible to have a rational conversatin about art of any sort if "value judgments" raise their ugly heads. The only valid negative judgment of a building or a poemis simple silence. The only valid positive judgment is to discuss it. Intrusion of "this is good" ends the conversation.
It is simply impossible to fin any foundation upon which to ground either aesthetic or moral judgments. If an object can sustain a conversation (written or oral)over some time, and if the conversation is varied (different parts of the conversation appear to be incompatible), then a positive social judgment has arisen. When the conversation ceases, a negative judgment has been made. This damning and competitive praising of this or that building or musical composition or text is pretty silly. At least I've been unable to read more than a few sentences of any of these posts.
Correction. Michael Pollak's post on the history of music was a jewel. It actually increased knowledge.
Carrol
P.S. Northrop Frye's attempt to theorize criticism in _Anatomy of Criticism_ was dead in the water from the day it was published. But much inhis polemical Introduction and many of the brief discussion of individual works still remain of considerable interest.