Choosing the Best in Artworks
- Sarnav
- 8 minutes ago
- 5 min read
Throughout history, humanity has always sought to identify the best in every field. Examples of this include the most beautiful woman, the fastest athlete, the most successful TV series and the best science fiction novel. We are constantly creating standards of success. We rank people and things, choosing those we deem successful. But how valid and reliable are these choices? Are we really selecting the "best"?
Today, I saw a social media post titled "The 100 Best Science Fiction Novels List". It was a personal ranking by someone I didn’t know. The comments were more interesting than the list itself. People were calling the books on the list "outdated", "old-fashioned", "influenced by pop culture", "overhyped", "exaggerated" and "unnecessary". I was surprised because I didn’t agree with any of these comments. Ultimately, these comments were subjective labels that went beyond personal taste.
I had similar thoughts about some of the books mentioned by name, of course, but it would be unwise to make a definitive judgement. Clearly, most of the books on this list are ones that the person likes. However, rather than viewing the issue in this way, some people saw the inclusion of old books on the list as an attack on the value of new books. I found this surprising.
I thought it was a seemingly innocent issue, but one that could become complicated in terms of the psychological factors behind it. I pondered this. What criteria do we use to create such rankings? Are we acting sincerely? What can we really say is the best? Or is it just a form of advertising?
I previously wrote an article about rating artworks. I think this topic is similar. For those who are curious, I have included the link below.
Let's continue with the literature-based example I mentioned.
The phrase “the best” implies both a ranking and an absolute claim. That is the promise. However, these rankings are often created by individuals or groups who have joined forces for a specific purpose. Awards are usually presented accordingly.
So, what constitutes a book as sufficient from a literary point of view? I am sure that many criteria come to mind. Let's list some of them.
Firstly, the work should have literary depth and narrative power. It should strive for perfection in terms of language, structure and expression. Popularity will also bring it to the fore. After all, the more we talk about something, the more it stays in the spotlight. This is true whether the work is good or bad. These factors will be reflected in sales figures and visibility on social media. On the other hand, the author's identity is also important. Perhaps we consider them to be well-known or successful authors. But could they produce poor work? If they have won awards before, we might think they have a head start. Alternatively, maybe a friend has read and liked one of their books and recommended it to us. We may feel closer to this author's work than to another novel on our bookshelf, which increases its value in our eyes.
We've just touched on some basic elements here. All of these are potential factors in determining whether a book is good or the best. Needless to say, not every book has all these qualities. So, is there really no difference between a widely discussed book and one that has remained unknown? Could a lesser-known work be better than a new book by a popular author?
Photo by FETHI BOUHAOUCHINE on Unsplash
Ranking can also be used to draw attention to one thing while making another invisible. For example, imagine that at an exhibition, all the paintings are hung side by side, but only one is labelled “the best work”. Does this label diminish the value of the others? No, but it may cause us to overlook them. Perhaps the painting labelled “the best” does not inspire us, but another might. In short, the impact is personal. Every viewer, reader or listener interprets a painting, book or piece of music differently. These interpretations are not objective.
The reason I give these examples is this: If we continue with literature, books are not just objects; they are experiences. They are completed by the reader. Therefore, when we say that a book is “the best” or “the worst”, we are usually expressing positive thoughts, such as “it was effective for me” or “it motivated me to do something after reading it”, or negative thoughts, such as “I don't think I'll pick it up again” or “I personally didn't find it satisfying”. All of this leads us to approach our evaluations emotionally. In other words, our evaluations are personal and unique to us, so they are likely to differ from those of others. However, they are also not measurable.
Yes, the two key phrases here are interpreting from an emotional perspective and being able to measure. This is because works of art originate from within the individual. Since they are conveyed through free expression without disregarding the written rules of literature, our interpretations of them are emotional, too. Our unique characters, shaped by our distinct emotional landscapes, naturally result in differences in the art we love. This is only natural.
We must therefore ask: “Are artistic works immeasurable"? Today, it has become increasingly clear that rankings based on artistic rather than scientific criteria largely result from perception management, editorial preferences, and direct advertising strategies. Publishers achieve this by bombarding us with advertisements to meet sales targets, posting insincere content to influence audiences of contracted internet celebrities and promoting their friends as writers while pushing other quality writers into obscurity. Such actions, driven solely by financial gain, are incompatible with the essence of art and may also be unethical. These promotions and impositions lead us to talk about, purchase and review works more frequently. As previously mentioned, even poor works remain in the spotlight through discussion, etching their names into people's minds and inevitably attracting interest and approval. This has always been the case throughout history.
You might be thinking, "I agree, but how are we going to rank them?" Firstly, remember that we don't have to take everything so seriously. When created within the right framework, a ranking does not necessarily result in a loss. The purpose of this text is to share my thoughts on the topic and encourage discussion about whether the works in our ranking are in the right place.
The best approach is to first determine our criteria and narrow them down as much as possible.
We should not include works simply because we have heard of them or know that they are classics — we must have read them. Our choices should be made honestly and transparently within the context we have determined. At the same time, we must make it clear to ourselves and others that the list is not definitive. For this reason, rather than using the word “best” in our titles, we should use vague yet intriguing and inviting alternatives. Examples include “Books that caught my attention”, “Books I enjoyed reading”, “Books I can't wait to read again”, “Books that are noteworthy in these respects”, “Books that could stand out in this regard”, and “Books that fans of the x genre might want to take the time to read”.
However, if the goal is to engage in mischievous behaviour similar to that of publishers, we will use clickbait headlines designed to immediately pique readers' curiosity. In such cases, it will be clear that the aim is to deliberately provoke interaction. This approach is unlikely to be taken seriously.
Comments