The Art Quality Tier List (AQTL)

I think I just figured out what art is. Took me decades.

Here’s my definition, which has two primary components:

So that’s two pieces of the definition:

1. Indirect expression

2. Of something that matters.

The indirect part is key because you’re not just clinically describing the scene of an accident, for example, even though the accident matters to someone ¹ . With art, you’re showing rather than telling. You’re presenting one thing, and what comes through is something else.

And the second piece is that it has to matter. To humans. To us. The thing being conveyed has to have valence. And the more it matters—and the deeper we feel it as the consumer of the art—the better.

So that’s the definition. As for the execution, I think there are three components that cause us to move up in the tier list we see above.

1. The quality of the message

2. The quality of the expression

3. The authenticity of the exercise

The message is the thing being conveyed. Pain, happiness, etc. And the more powerful, complex, nuanced, that is—the better the art. Then there’s the execution of the transfer mechanism, so like the quality of the song, or painting, or whatever. Those are the big ones.

And then there’s the authenticity. We humans often care about the story behind a piece of art because it adds (or detracts) from the meaning. Like if you love a piece but find out it was made on a dare in 30 minutes to prove that you can create a painting without feeling anything—the emotional value of the piece basically goes to zero.

This is instructive not just for regular art, but for the pushback against AI art as well.

There’s a hidden implication in art—or at least good art—that the thing being communicated is actually felt by the artist.

I think this explains why many are angry about AI art. As good as AI is right now, nobody’s arguing that AI creating an image or video is feeling anything.

So that’s a fair point against AI art: It can’t be conveying emotion because no emotion is being experienced by the artist.

But I think there’s another loser way to define art that’s also captured in the Tier list, which is on the receiving end. In other words, if the viewer of the art feels a thing, and that thing matters to them as a human, then I think we can still argue it’s art.

It’s still indirect communication, and it still conveyed something that matters—it’s just not authentic.

And that’s how we end up with the tier list.

As mentioned, I’m very much an art amateur, so I look forward to feedback from people who’ve thought about this for a long time. ²

1  It’s quite possible, obviously, to describe something artistically. Which is why I used the word “clinically” here.

2  Thanks to Kelly Small and Saša Zdjelar for their wisdom and contributions on this.