The principles of art
by R. G. Collingwood · first published 1656
7mentions
2recommended by
5HN commenters
2018–2026first – last mentioned
40% recommend60% neutral
Affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Mentions per year
What Hacker News says
Related books
2013–2026Make It Stick
Peter C. Brown, Henry L. Roediger, Mark A. McDaniel
Recommended by 52 · mentioned by 6352 recommend · 63 mention52 recommend · 6352 recommend
2018–2026A Philosophy of Software Design
John K. Ousterhout
Recommended by 163 · mentioned by 232163 recommend · 232 mention163 recommend · 232163 recommend
2014–2026Designing Data-Intensive Applications
Martin Kleppmann
Recommended by 457 · mentioned by 659457 recommend · 659 mention457 recommend · 659457 recommend
His book The Principles of Art from 1938 is probably the best example. He offers a definition of art arrived at through ordinary language philosophy, and, along the way, also develops a theory of imagination, language, and anti-copyright.
on “Saul Kripke has died” ↗…emotions generated by reading the poem, so that the audience feels less emotionally burdened by the time it ends. I particularly like R. G. Collingwood's historical commentary on their debate in The Principles of Art (published 1938), where he talks about our addiction to entertainment and being trapped in a vicious cycle ("one more episode").
on “The Tears of a Clown: Probing the comedian's psyche (2008)” ↗…with counter-arguments in mind. I would not recommend pop-sci books for this, because their arguments and writing tends to be quite flabby. I'd actually recommend something like RG Collingwood's "The Principles of Art" which is a relatively plain English example of well written philosophy: https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.188470/page/n1... You will disagree with him. The point is to understand how and…
on “Ask HN: How can I grow as an engineer without good seniors to learn from?” ↗> I would say both the audience and the playwright operate in a symbiosis; they serve one another, and they both have responsibilities in the matter. You may enjoy reading R. G. Collingwood’s The Principles of Art. Here is a relevant excerpt: “ Next, with regard to the arts of performance, where one man designs a work of art and another, or a group of others, executes it. Ruskin (who was not always wrong) insisted…
on “That people produce HTML with string templates is telling us something” ↗Refreshing. Where can I find more -- do you know who the author is and title of this work? Edit: Found it. The Principles of Art by Robin George Collingwood
on “Creative workers deserve better than a choice as to who rips them off” ↗…bound to a cultural context. This is also not true. This idea mostly comes from the Romantic period. Modern day versions of it are often really just referencing a single book from the 1930s called The Principles of Art by a guy named R.G. Collingwood. It’s a very recent way of seeing art. Historically, art was connected to religion, and therefore thought to be valuable because it was universal rather than individualistic…
on “AI makes you boring” ↗…the music-as-art thing, like classical soloists, jazz groups, singers where the important thing is to sound like yourself (and to sound good!) [0] I'm thinking craft in the sense Collingwood uses it in Principles of Art - craft (as opposed to art) is when you know beforehand exactly what final result you're aiming for and what steps to follow to get there.
on “The Benjamin Franklin method for learning more from programming books” ↗