artistic value judgment is fake as fuck (so long as you only have one perspective to see the world through)

to demarcate the border between "content" and "art" is to attempt to get two individual solids out of two intertwining gases. i do not find myself believing in "high art" nor "low art", nor such a "content-art" dichotomy - at least in the work itself divorced from all context - at all, and as far as the work concerns me, it is all the same. i do not see a reason as to why my perception of a work should be tainted by what it, as a sign, does not point to. what i describe as "content" is defined by function defining form, to serve the algorithm/analytics, as opposed to the audience, as opposed to the self - and "art" is just anything the observer wishes to call it. the work underneath the label of "content" is a sign that points to the label itself, and lends itself to a commonality of a very specific kind of insincerity unique to it - where a given work is punished/rewarded for various facets of its being, and the works' creators spawn mutated specimen from the feedback the analytics give, and shove those specimen back into the machine to fulfill an iteration of the cycle. in this, works shall be individual creatures, genres as species, and their sole predator as the platform that conceived them.  ..

thoiught process terminated [[initial written 2.27.26]