This is somewhat silly without having a specific art object to debate, but I see variations of your argument all the time made as an attempt to discredit or dismiss a work of genius that they simply don't get.
For instance, you talk a lot about what a piece of art means, but much of art embraced concepts of subjectivity and meaninglessness before social psychology even existed as a proper discipline.
In fact, some of the seemingly obscure art is a meta-critique on obscure art.
The very goal of looking for the meaning of a piece in the sense of a message it is trying to convey is going to be wrong-headed in a large number of cases right out of the gate.
What's the meaning of jazz music? What's the meaning of architecture? Or the movements of modern dance or a Rothko painting?
My point is, while you can imagine a scenario in which the artist is being smug jerk trying to look smart by being impossible, that's much, much more rare than someone approaching a work of art and arrogantly saying, "That is just garbage," about something that a large number of educated people recognize as brilliance.
And Calvin's got a good point about art snobs, not artists and not the audience for art at large.
For instance, you talk a lot about what a piece of art means, but much of art embraced concepts of subjectivity and meaninglessness before social psychology even existed as a proper discipline.
In fact, some of the seemingly obscure art is a meta-critique on obscure art.
The very goal of looking for the meaning of a piece in the sense of a message it is trying to convey is going to be wrong-headed in a large number of cases right out of the gate.
What's the meaning of jazz music? What's the meaning of architecture? Or the movements of modern dance or a Rothko painting?
My point is, while you can imagine a scenario in which the artist is being smug jerk trying to look smart by being impossible, that's much, much more rare than someone approaching a work of art and arrogantly saying, "That is just garbage," about something that a large number of educated people recognize as brilliance.
And Calvin's got a good point about art snobs, not artists and not the audience for art at large.