on the contrary...his work is appreciated differently by different people. It is subject to personal preferences..
I read his work, I enjoy it. I would read more, but I would not place genius on it. So while I don't deny it, I question the title..
From a completely objective standpoint, and as one schooled in the art (not that it qualifies me more than others)...I can honestly say that one may disagree with the content and characterizations, but one absolutely cannot quibble with the craft. The label is hardly subjective...but your opinion is yours.
not to belabour the point...but once again I beg to differ.
The arts are subjective. That, to me, is what makes it an art - subject only to the senses which are as yet, unquantifiable. I
do quibble with the idea of objective 'craft' - what then is the definition of craft? One craftsman may bring you to tears with his rendition while another, in the same genre, may leave you unaffected. It has the je ne sais quoi for you but not for me. I think that is the beauty in art. How many times have we said "I don't know why, but I like that..."? While someone else looks at it and steupse?
My opinion is mine yes, of course, it cannot be otherwise. I learned that I can only present it, I cannot force it on others. It's an art...
Good seque away from Naipaul...he frets me.