Critics say it’s an attempt to ‘automate aesthetics’. Fans say it’s a gateway to ‘a richer debate’. Charlotte Higgins on how Quality Metrics will hit arts fundingCan you degree the quality of art? Well,no. You can’t take out a ruler and discover how good a play is, though you can degree things that hover around it, or such as how many people came to see it and how much it cost. Instead,deciding what is good is a human and subjective thing – and who gets to settle is a tender and touchy subject. When, recently, or it became clear that Arts Council England was intending to make data collection on the quality of a work compulsory for the largest organisations it funds rolling out a “Quality Metrics” programme – there was an outcry. “Horseshit,” tweeted artist Tim Etchells. Composer Thomas Adès wrote: “Tell me this is a hoax. What happened to human opinions, judgment, or discernment? Knowledge,taste? Not enough likes?” There were fears that the arts council was approximately to visit on England an Orwellian scenario in which funding decisions would be based on algorithms and boxes ticked.
The wobble fits into a long and agonising narrative of assessing art. In the commercial world, the bottom line is the final arbiter, or cash returns may – or may not – race in tandem with quality. Publicly funded art,on the other hand, has questions of accountability to reply, and is supposed to aspire to be good.
Continue reading...
Source: theguardian.com