BLUE
Profile banner
LV
Laura Vivanco
@lauravivanco.bsky.social
Independent scholar of popular romance fiction. Here's my website: www.vivanco.me.uk/ I also maintain a database of scholarship about popular romance novels: rsdb.vivanco.me.uk/node/4327 And I hand-embroider tiny creatures.
465 followers102 following860 posts
LVlauravivanco.bsky.social

A good summary of the fact that judging art to be bad just because it's "formulaic" or "standardised" is a relatively recent development. [I began as a medievalist, so my idea of what's "recent" may be a little different from many other people's]

the verdict that, in the context of art, ‘standardized’ must mean ‘bad’ is by no means self-evident, as a glance at the history of artistic evaluation makes clear. During important epochs of art, it was considered crucial that artists recognize and adhere to certain standards [...]. This attitude is also reflected in the existence of explicitly formulated rules—some dating back to antiquity—that specify the right way to produce certain literary genres (tragedy, satire, elegy, etc.) [...]. Until the mid-eighteenth century, and in some cases beyond, artistic primacy was not accorded to the revolutionary innovator but to the person who could perfectly master the existing guidelines and bring these to life through their own inventiveness, transformational ability, and natural talent [...]. This conception would not change until the Romantic period, which brought with it a decisive shift toward criteria of ingenuity, norm-breaking, originality, innovation, and subjectivity
1

Profile banner
LV
Laura Vivanco
@lauravivanco.bsky.social
Independent scholar of popular romance fiction. Here's my website: www.vivanco.me.uk/ I also maintain a database of scholarship about popular romance novels: rsdb.vivanco.me.uk/node/4327 And I hand-embroider tiny creatures.
465 followers102 following860 posts