Sure, I know the thread is about good writing, but I enjoy that greatness and pie came up along the way.

And I don't mean to disagree with a utilitarian view, I just don't think it's much fun. It's quite like saying that something is successful because it succeded. That the fittest survive because--look, these things survived, so they are therefore the "fittest" to survive. I prefer to speculate that maybe fitter things are smacked down by chance and mishap, and that great art is often appreciated for reasons accidental to it's intentions, or "functions", if you like. To me it's an explanation that fails because it can't be wrong. It's like walking a tightrope flat on the floor--there's nowhere to fall.

   I like the bits and lines and examples--they don't really explain it either, but it's fun to hear what particularly strikes people, and feels like a fuller explanation, even if it doesn't really explain.