Menu
Newsletter
Tuesday 3rd November 2026
I’ve always been fascinated by the question of what makes good things good?
We could say "it’s all just opinion". And that might be true. But if we compare Beethoven’s 9th symphony to someone mashing their palms on piano keys, one is clearly better than the other. For all intents and purposes, we know the 9th is better, and if we say it’s not, we’re overthinking it. So there is a spectrum of good and not-so-good.
In that case, what makes good things good? Whether it’s a novel, a piece of music, a painting – what is it?
I have come to believe that "good things" are conceptually sharp.
That doesn’t mean we need to know what the piece is about. It doesn’t need to be about anything. Nor does it mean that the work itself needs to be sharp (as opposed to soft).
But conceptually, even if the central idea is mysterious to the audience, it is sharp. It expresses something boldly and specifically, even if it’s complex. The choices are loud and vibrant, even if the result is softness, vagueness, and subtlety.
When a piece of art fails to be conceptually sharp, it feels confused and wishy-washy.
Why do some Beatles songs fall to the bottom of their discography? Why do some Van Gogh paintings sink beneath his others? We can feel they’re simply not as good, but we don’t always know why.
I believe it’s because they are conceptually weaker than the other ones. Musically, compositionally, lyrically, tonally, and so on. Those pieces didn’t penetrate us as deeply, because the concept was not sharp enough.
It’s a difficult one to explain.
I need to think about it a bit more.