In arts you find artist, a piece of work and yourself as the observer. A not very fancy but vintage approach comes from Saalfeld (sorry, we did not find him on Wiki…). But we found his target model in a encyclopedia of psychology. It’s about how we and the artist perceive his assumed masterpiece. You can’t barley read the target, so here it is (from inside out):
- Arts of contentless banality (not art)
- Arts of timeless comprehensibility (well, has been art)
- Arts like “I get it, but still not really ” (art in no historical context yet, no objective measurement for its quality)
- Arts that is accessible for experts and the artist (because I don’t understand it, it must be art)
- Arts only accessible to artist (very fancy art)
We miss the time aspect. “Scrap” can become a masterpiece and the other way around.