James\' \"The Art of Fiction\"

¶ … James' "The Art of Fiction" was expecting this essay on the art of fiction to be boring, but instead I found myself agreeing with a lot of what novelist Henry James had to say. Very often I have found that discussions as to what makes art artistic, or how to define art, generally suck the enjoyment out of the art, I was expecting more of the same in James' essay. But what he had to say about the art of fiction made a lot of sense, and I think his point ultimately is that we can decide for ourselves what is good and bad, but the real measure of an artist is found not by measuring them against the standards of the critic or of society, but by the standards of that artist.

To me, this is a very crucial point that James makes. No one can really decide what is good and bad in art; that changes from one historical period to the next and from one culture to the next, and even between individuals. Instead, success can only be determined by the artist. This does not mean that all art can be considered good art; I think that most real artists can admit that there are times when they are less successful at reaching their goals and fulfilling their visions than others. I also think that one of the measures of an amateur artists -- one who will never really be "good" -- is that they cannot clearly define what their intentions were.