My only two cents here (well, that I actually want to discuss, lol) is around the idea of what standards might even look like, especially when it comes to things like writing or acting.
I am a bit at a loss when I try to articulate an answer to the question "what does good acting look like?". The best answer I can come up with is "a performance that fits the material," which is obviously very subjective.
I'd also add that even with standards, it's still incredibly hard to score things. I score student writing and speaking based on pretty clear standards, but it's still hard at times. Did this student write an essay that was well-organized, mostly well-organized, or minimally organized? Did the essay include minimal elaboration on their reasons, some elaboration on their reasons, or strong elaboration on their reasons? Even against a rubric/checklist it's hard to escape some degree of subjectivity, and I think that acting as if you're above that subjectivity is a mistake.
I do think that if you do like something or don't like something, you need to be able to say why. But I think that even having standards doesn't get you to objectivity. If I say, "Wow! That performance was amazing and I felt like the actress totally embodied a social worker!" and another person says, "Really? I felt like the whole time I was watching someone playing a part" . . . I think it's really hard to prove or disprove either viewpoint.
I think that the desire for objectivity is often driven by a need to be provably correct about something, and I just don't think that's possible when it comes to art. (And especially movies which often have so many moving pieces and contributors). This is painful to people like me, who absolutely LIVE for being unquestionably correct about things!
I am a bit at a loss when I try to articulate an answer to the question "what does good acting look like?". The best answer I can come up with is "a performance that fits the material," which is obviously very subjective.
I'd also add that even with standards, it's still incredibly hard to score things. I score student writing and speaking based on pretty clear standards, but it's still hard at times. Did this student write an essay that was well-organized, mostly well-organized, or minimally organized? Did the essay include minimal elaboration on their reasons, some elaboration on their reasons, or strong elaboration on their reasons? Even against a rubric/checklist it's hard to escape some degree of subjectivity, and I think that acting as if you're above that subjectivity is a mistake.
I do think that if you do like something or don't like something, you need to be able to say why. But I think that even having standards doesn't get you to objectivity. If I say, "Wow! That performance was amazing and I felt like the actress totally embodied a social worker!" and another person says, "Really? I felt like the whole time I was watching someone playing a part" . . . I think it's really hard to prove or disprove either viewpoint.
I think that the desire for objectivity is often driven by a need to be provably correct about something, and I just don't think that's possible when it comes to art. (And especially movies which often have so many moving pieces and contributors). This is painful to people like me, who absolutely LIVE for being unquestionably correct about things!