Darkuser writes: "the ruins of Egypt or the pyramids may well be beautiful in shape or form, in a pure aesthetic sense; but is it possible to fully appreciate these monuments without knowledge of the history or even the archaeology?"

As a person with more than a passing interest in the Pyramids, I think I can safely answer: No.
IMO, knowing how these incredible monuments were (probably*) built adds another awe-inspiring dimension to their already sheer majesty.

Darkuser writes: "IMO, what is subjective here are the ways in which people choose to appreciate art. Clearly there isn't a "correct" way to do this."

I couldn't agree more.

And continues: "Those who truely enjoy a piece of art, while not necessarily wanting to discover its context, will probably want to investigate the artist's intentions, but isn't this process highly subjective and personal?"

I have still to get to grips with L Swilley's reply to my question about knowing what a creator/author meant, but at the moment I'm inclined to agree wholeheartedly with DU.

In an episode of the American sit-com Taxi, (a series I used to enjoy immensely) two of the central characters visit an art gallery.
One of them looks at and points to a statuette (I think) and asks his companion: "Is that good?"
His companion asks him: "Do you like it?"
"Yes", he replies.
"Then it is good." says his companion.

I wonder, can one apply the same reasoning to a novel?

Regards,

Alex