Thread Tools
Old March 2, 2004, 02:07   #91
Pax
Chieftain
 
Pax's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 37
Whoever said that there were no new ideas?
Think of all the things that have been invented since that person died.
__________________
What can make a nigga wanna fight a whole night club/Figure that he ought to maybe be a pimp simply 'cause he don't like love/What can make a nigga wanna achy, break all rules/In a book when it took a lot to get you hooked up to this volume/
What can make a nigga wanna loose all faith in/Anything that he can't feel through his chest wit sensation
Pax is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 02:20   #92
Oncle Boris
Mac
Emperor
 
Oncle Boris's Avatar
 
Local Time: 14:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Directly from the FART international airport
Posts: 3,045
Quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
But I am not a Marxist and reject that view and the view of 'class struggle' throughout history is the main struggle. Therefore your whole view of art is rejected by me and I have not be satisfied as to why art needs to be the 'text' of anything.
Not so fast. You don't have to agree with Marx to agree with this view of art (which was created in the 50s by French Marxists). First, I'm almost sure I've not made myself entirely clear, because I'm tired and all, so I apologize.

The first thing to know is, are you denying class struggle, or you only claim that is not the driving force behind history?

Second, I am not entirely justifying X conception of art as being inherently good because it comes from X class. I was merely responding to your argument, which asked, I think, "why would it be that the liberal elite is a better standard than the ruling one? In both cases we have elites who are creating something with different but equally valid goals".

To which, I was responding that the ruling elite creates art for its own domination, while the liberal one, as an "institutionalized" revolutionary force (i.e. when the Revolution becomes the Left), tries to deny the "natural order" created by the ruling class.

Now, listen carefully, because it's quite complex, and I might spoil it because it comes from a French thinker I've read in French. (R. Barthes)

You pretty much have to admit that language, in the first place, is a tool in the hand of humanity that has been arbitrarily chosen to shape and describe the world (read my post on differenciation for more details). The great thing about this, is that Marxism is a form of existentialism, that says that humans define themselves by working Nature- (ergo, the idea that the structuralist studies of language fitted perfectly with marxism). This Nature does not have any essence, and neither do humans. They are both shaping and shaped material, with no clear-cut identity.

If the role of Art is to be realist, to represent the Real, then it has to be, as I said, ever moving and self-defining: it has to lie outside of language, because language is merely a conscious mechanism by which we recognize a differanciation system.

Now, whether you are Marxist or not, you've got to admit that society builds an order, and that this order has to look like it is natural and inalienable. In other words, you have to deny Nature; you have to act like the world and humans are known; you therefore have to create art in which there is good and evil, emotional balance, and morale exutory.

If art belonged to Man and not Society, it would be foggy, unclear, passionate; it would refuse to take a chain of meaning (sentences, pictures, sounds) and pose it for anything else than for what it MEANS, rather than creating a new order built on words (apparent language) instead of concepts (what is close to our perception); thus,p it would be profoundly Revolutionary- in a metaphoric way. What I am supposing here, is that purity of creation and mental nirvana can only be reached when art belongs to man.

The only marxist premice you have to admit, is that the liberal elite is more likely to make art that goes in that way. For the rest, you are free to agree on the definition and say it could also be achieved in a non-marxist society.

OK. I'm not sure I'm being clear, but I hope you'll cease being a lawyer for a few moments and read it without this "let's beat Oncle Boris" purpose in mind.
__________________
"Now you're gonna ask me, is it an enforcer's job to drop the gloves against the other team's best player? Well sure no, but you've gotta know, these guys, they don't think like you and me." (Joël Bouchard, commenting on the Gaborik-Carcillo incident).
Oncle Boris is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 05:53   #93
Urban Ranger
NationStatesApolyton Storywriters' GuildNever Ending Stories
Deity
 
Urban Ranger's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:38
Local Date: November 3, 2010
Join Date: May 1999
Location: The City State of Noosphere, CPA special envoy
Posts: 14,606
Quote:
Originally posted by monolith94
" Can not a chair be a work of art?"

Of course it can. Here's a good example, by Alvar Aalto. Godfather of Finnish industrial design.

Pah. Where's the ergonomics factor?
__________________
(\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
(='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
(")_(") "Starting the fire from within."
Urban Ranger is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 05:55   #94
Urban Ranger
NationStatesApolyton Storywriters' GuildNever Ending Stories
Deity
 
Urban Ranger's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:38
Local Date: November 3, 2010
Join Date: May 1999
Location: The City State of Noosphere, CPA special envoy
Posts: 14,606
Quote:
Originally posted by monolith94
So I guess you don't agree that "there are no new ideas" ?
Of course not. Before Einstein, there was no Relativity.
__________________
(\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
(='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
(")_(") "Starting the fire from within."
Urban Ranger is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 18:17   #95
molly bloom
King
 
molly bloom's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:38
Local Date: November 3, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lundenwic
Posts: 2,719
Quote:
Originally posted by Oncle Boris


In the case of the common paintings of religious scenes, I'd say it's merely art- because its function was to educate first, not to make revolutionary aesthetic statements.
All art is propaganda, but not all propaganda is art.

'Merely art'- are the cave paintings of Lascaux and Altamira 'merely art' or do they have a religious or cultural significance which we cannot divine, or define?


How about the dot painting of Australian aborigines which use a visual language intelligible to aborigines but not to most other people?

Are they avant garde, 'merely art', propaganda, what?

They might superficially look like a once 'avant garde' Damien Hirst painting but they have a different function.

What was once avant garde becomes commonplace- the rejected Impressionists triumph over academicians such as Bouguereau and Tissot, and fetch absurdly high prices, as do Van Gogh and Cezanne and Matisse and Gauguin.

Mondrian's art becomes a Sixties 'Mondrian sack' dress, or wallpaper; Rapahel's cherubs become illustrated notepaper, and Leonardo's ideal man is used as a television lead in.

At the same time, popular 'mass' culture is (re)used in 'avant garde' art- a long tradition from the use of popular melodies in Roman Catholic mass settings, to newspaper clippings, linoleum patterns and disposable toy cars in Picasso's work, or mass produced Duco paint in Jackson Pollock's paintings, or ephemera in the work of Joseph Cornell or advertising in British and American Pop Art.

All art educates to a degree, even 'bad' art, whatever you consider that to be (socialist realism, Nazi Romanticism, Brutalism, Arte Povera), if only to make you think about the alternatives to what you are looking at, or listening to, or living in.
__________________
Cherish your youth. Mark Foley, 2002

I don't know what you're talking about by international law. G.W. Bush, 12/03
molly bloom is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 18:28   #96
The Mad Viking
King
 
The Mad Viking's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: of the Great White North
Posts: 1,790
Quote:
Originally posted by FS*
The big distinction from my years in art college was commercial art vs. fine art.

The commercial artists were all sellouts and whores, while the fine artists were the ones with no technical prowess and subjective perspectives on art that were so obtuse as to completely lose most viewers.
@ FS*

__________________
Best MMORPG on the net: www.cyberdunk.com?ref=310845

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. -Gandhi
The Mad Viking is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 18:37   #97
Starchild
Apolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
Starchild's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a raving alcoholic drama queen with a penchant for the biosciences
Posts: 3,646
There are three forms of art:

1) Art I'd put in my house.
2) Art I'd put in a gallery
3) Crap

Only catagory 1 matters to me, avante-garde and popular opinion be damned.
__________________
Exult in your existence, because that very process has blundered unwittingly on its own negation. Only a small, local negation, to be sure: only one species, and only a minority of that species; but there lies hope. [...] Stand tall, Bipedal Ape. The shark may outswim you, the cheetah outrun you, the swift outfly you, the capuchin outclimb you, the elephant outpower you, the redwood outlast you. But you have the biggest gifts of all: the gift of understanding the ruthlessly cruel process that gave us all existence [and the] gift of revulsion against its implications.
-Richard Dawkins
Starchild is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 18:41   #98
molly bloom
King
 
molly bloom's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:38
Local Date: November 3, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lundenwic
Posts: 2,719
Quote:
Originally posted by The Mad Viking


@ FS*

I remember seeing the work of a photographer reviewed in the Arts section of London's 'Time Out'.

Most of the photographs were out of focus, badly organised visually, and clipped clumsily. The reviewer said that the photographer was not interested in traditional concepts of framing, and reproduction, and quality- I thought, well, if that had been a bricklayer building a wall, or a plumber fixing a drain, I'd be suing them.

How the reviewer could intuit that the photographer actually knew what they were doing, or couldn't tell the operations of a camera from the instructions on a boil in the bag meal, I'm not sure.

Of course, that may have been the point, but I'm afraid the photographs didn't stake a claim on my imagination.

Andy Warhol once worked as a commercial artist, as did David Bowie.

I've never understood this supposed difference between 'high art' and 'commercial art'- Shakespeare was a commercial artist, so was Michelangelo, Van Eyck, Vermeer, Rembrandt, Dickens, Picasso and Matisse- they were paid, they expected to be paid, they sold their work.

I see no virtue in starving for hunger's sake.
__________________
Cherish your youth. Mark Foley, 2002

I don't know what you're talking about by international law. G.W. Bush, 12/03
molly bloom is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 18:55   #99
Imran Siddiqui
staff
Apolytoners Hall of FameAge of Nations TeamPolyCast Team
 
Imran Siddiqui's Avatar
 
Local Time: 14:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: on the corner of Peachtree and Peachtree
Posts: 30,698
Quote:
To which, I was responding that the ruling elite creates art for its own domination, while the liberal one, as an "institutionalized" revolutionary force (i.e. when the Revolution becomes the Left), tries to deny the "natural order" created by the ruling class.
In essense both elite try to create art for their own domination, they just have different defintions on what 'domination' means . The liberal elite want domination over the minds of the 'intellectual' and in order to do so engage in this sort of destructive avant guard.

Quote:
If the role of Art is to be realist, to represent the Real, then it has to be, as I said, ever moving and self-defining: it has to lie outside of language, because language is merely a conscious mechanism by which we recognize a differanciation system.
But art doesn't always have to represent the real. In fact, the avant guard art you point to doesn't represent any reality. A lot of art may indeed represent reality, but much of it goes beyond reality. Just like it goes beyond language.

Quote:
you have to deny Nature; you have to act like the world and humans are known; you therefore have to create art in which there is good and evil, emotional balance, and morale exutory.
Not really. Why does a denial of Nature (which I'm not sure most societies do, they embrace Nature and say their order is most conducive to that nature) mean there must be art with is black and white and moral?

Quote:
creating a new order built on words (apparent language) instead of concepts (what is close to our perception); thus,p it would be profoundly Revolutionary- in a metaphoric way.
Why is it creating a new order rather than continuing an existing one? Is man simply a part of his society? So if art was for man rather than society (as you say), wouldn't the man simply create art which would mostly fit his society? And only a relative few would try to go beyond society.
__________________
“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
- John 13:34-35 (NRSV)
Imran Siddiqui is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 18:57   #100
The Mad Viking
King
 
The Mad Viking's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: of the Great White North
Posts: 1,790
In Jared Diamond's The Third Chimpanzee he tells of how they had Chimpanzees complete "abstract expressionist" paintings.

They showed them to artists and critics, and got long, serious analyses of the artistic merits. A lot like what Monolith wrote in his paper.

While most people would take this as invalidating the artists and critics, I'm not so sure.

It does show clearly that ART is 50% in the eye of the beholder. What we bring to art is as important as what is already there.

Plus, chimps are 98% human DNA. Why shouldn't they be artists, too?
__________________
Best MMORPG on the net: www.cyberdunk.com?ref=310845

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. -Gandhi
The Mad Viking is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 19:10   #101
molly bloom
King
 
molly bloom's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:38
Local Date: November 3, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lundenwic
Posts: 2,719
Quote:
Originally posted by The Mad Viking
In Jared Diamond's The Third Chimpanzee he tells of how they had Chimpanzees complete "abstract expressionist" paintings.

They showed them to artists and critics, and got long, serious analyses of the artistic merits.
How many of us who don't know say, Chinese calligraphy, or Islamic art, could write about the nuances of either?

Would anyone not familiar with Chinese calligraphy or the different forms of Islamic calligraphy be able to distinguish random brushstrokes from characters or words?

What art is, and is used for, is culturally determined. Many artists have talked about wanting to get back to the way a child looks at the world, before preconceptions about what the world 'should' look like, intruded.

Samuel Beckett took inspiration from a textbook primer for French schoolchildren in order to make his prose style less ornate.

It's entirely possible that a higher primate such as a chimpanzee, given the tools might create 'art', or already does, but how would a human recognise something so far outside their usual understanding?
__________________
Cherish your youth. Mark Foley, 2002

I don't know what you're talking about by international law. G.W. Bush, 12/03
molly bloom is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 19:15   #102
Rogan Josh
Prince
 
Local Time: 19:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Posts: 366
Art is dead. Long live Science.
Rogan Josh is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 19:31   #103
MOBIUS
Emperor
 
Local Time: 04:38
Local Date: November 3, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Caerdydd, Cymru
Posts: 5,303
Same old poly eh? Blowing a lot of hot air and chasing your tails as usual...

How many collective hours has everyone wasted typing their overly verbose opinions on this thread and where has it got you?

Some of the stuff on this thread really appalls me, like that mass produced soft-glow Thomas Kinkade sh*t for a start (he must laugh all the way to the bank every time some sucker buys one of his hideously overpriced offerings from one of his chainstores! )...

But it is art - because someone created it and someone (heaven help them!) likes it...

It's that simple.

None of this pseudo-intellectual d*ck waving where every here desperately jostles for position in the various interest camps as usual is required.

Totally unnecessary.

The only good thing about this thread appears to be the complete absence of Fez from this thread - it is just a shame that I had to suffer a Thomas Kinkade painting (the same one twice!) for that dubious pleasure...

So instead of the usual one-upmanship that this site has slipped into, why don't you just start appreciating art for art's sake?

Even if it is Thomas Kinkade!
__________________
"People would rather die than think, and most people do." - Bertrand Russell
MOBIUS is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 19:41   #104
yavoon
Warlord
 
Local Time: 18:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 155
art was just expression and entertainment. u express urself and the ppl who view get something out of it.

south park is art, and it ownz. so I like art
yavoon is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 23:42   #105
Lefty Scaevola
lifer
Emperor
 
Lefty Scaevola's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Posts: 3,815
Re: Why are we so illiterate about Art?
Quote:
Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Why is it that everyone is so illiterate when it comes to Art? The trend is generalized: only a fraction of usually intelligent people have something intelligent to say about Art. Could it be that art is not considered seriously? Why is it that an intelligent person would accept that art is here to manipulate emotions, and that's it?
Becasue so high a proportion of current art is ****, just an excuse for useless unproductive persons to artificialy inflate their egos.
__________________
Gaius Mucius Scaevola Sinistra
Japher: "crap, did I just post in this thread?"
"Bloody hell, Lefty.....number one in my list of persons I have no intention of annoying, ever." Bugs ****ing Bunny
From a 6th grader who readily adpated to internet culture: "Pay attention now, because your opinions suck"
Lefty Scaevola is offline  
Old March 2, 2004, 23:45   #106
Verto
Apolyton Storywriters' GuildNationStatesMac
King
 
Verto's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,824
Quote:
Originally posted by MOBIUS
Same old poly eh? Blowing a lot of hot air and chasing your tails as usual...

How many collective hours has everyone wasted typing their overly verbose opinions on this thread and where has it got you?

Some of the stuff on this thread really appalls me, like that mass produced soft-glow Thomas Kinkade sh*t for a start (he must laugh all the way to the bank every time some sucker buys one of his hideously overpriced offerings from one of his chainstores! )...

But it is art - because someone created it and someone (heaven help them!) likes it...

It's that simple.

None of this pseudo-intellectual d*ck waving where every here desperately jostles for position in the various interest camps as usual is required.

Totally unnecessary.

The only good thing about this thread appears to be the complete absence of Fez from this thread - it is just a shame that I had to suffer a Thomas Kinkade painting (the same one twice!) for that dubious pleasure...

So instead of the usual one-upmanship that this site has slipped into, why don't you just start appreciating art for art's sake?

Even if it is Thomas Kinkade!
If I'm reading between the lines correctly, it seems you don't like Kinkade?
Verto is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 00:10   #107
Urban Ranger
NationStatesApolyton Storywriters' GuildNever Ending Stories
Deity
 
Urban Ranger's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:38
Local Date: November 3, 2010
Join Date: May 1999
Location: The City State of Noosphere, CPA special envoy
Posts: 14,606
Quote:
Originally posted by molly bloom
I remember seeing the work of a photographer reviewed in the Arts section of London's 'Time Out'.

Most of the photographs were out of focus, badly organised visually, and clipped clumsily. The reviewer said that the photographer was not interested in traditional concepts of framing, and reproduction, and quality- I thought, well, if that had been a bricklayer building a wall, or a plumber fixing a drain, I'd be suing them.

How the reviewer could intuit that the photographer actually knew what they were doing, or couldn't tell the operations of a camera from the instructions on a boil in the bag meal, I'm not sure.
__________________
(\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
(='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
(")_(") "Starting the fire from within."
Urban Ranger is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 02:09   #108
Oncle Boris
Mac
Emperor
 
Oncle Boris's Avatar
 
Local Time: 14:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Directly from the FART international airport
Posts: 3,045
Re: Re: Why are we so illiterate about Art?
Quote:
Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
Becasue so high a proportion of current art is ****, just an excuse for useless unproductive persons to artificialy inflate their egos.
Well, if something is bad because it's in part inflating someone's ego, then, anything created by humaity is bad.
__________________
"Now you're gonna ask me, is it an enforcer's job to drop the gloves against the other team's best player? Well sure no, but you've gotta know, these guys, they don't think like you and me." (Joël Bouchard, commenting on the Gaborik-Carcillo incident).
Oncle Boris is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 02:21   #109
Oncle Boris
Mac
Emperor
 
Oncle Boris's Avatar
 
Local Time: 14:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Directly from the FART international airport
Posts: 3,045
Quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
In essense both elite try to create art for their own domination, they just have different defintions on what 'domination' means . The liberal elite want domination over the minds of the 'intellectual' and in order to do so engage in this sort of destructive avant guard.
The liberal elite never, ever dominates. When it start doing so, it's not the liberal elite anymore.

Quote:
But art doesn't always have to represent the real. In fact, the avant guard art you point to doesn't represent any reality. A lot of art may indeed represent reality, but much of it goes beyond reality. Just like it goes beyond language.
In a specific sense, you are right. However, the 'real' is meant here in very broad sense. Actually, you almost pointed it out- that what goes beyong language, is truly 'real', and not what tries to be so with overused conventions (example, Hollywoodian cinema). There is absolutely no way you can say that a painting by David is more realistic than one from Pollock.

Quote:
Not really. Why does a denial of Nature (which I'm not sure most societies do, they embrace Nature and say their order is most conducive to that nature) mean there must be art with is black and white and moral?
It sounds like you agree with me here. Embracing nature, or claiming you are, is necessarily denying it, in the sense that that it is being appropriated by a force, which is hijacking nature's true nature towards some goal.

Quote:
Why is it creating a new order rather than continuing an existing one? Is man simply a part of his society? So if art was for man rather than society (as you say), wouldn't the man simply create art which would mostly fit his society? And only a relative few would try to go beyond society.
Good point. In fact, society forces an unnatural order to man, and in such cannot truly belong to man. The order it creates is new, in that it is unnatural.

BTW, why are you discussing this with me? Do you agree or disagree that taking art for granted and linking it with emotional responses is being illiterate about it?
__________________
"Now you're gonna ask me, is it an enforcer's job to drop the gloves against the other team's best player? Well sure no, but you've gotta know, these guys, they don't think like you and me." (Joël Bouchard, commenting on the Gaborik-Carcillo incident).
Oncle Boris is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 02:30   #110
Imran Siddiqui
staff
Apolytoners Hall of FameAge of Nations TeamPolyCast Team
 
Imran Siddiqui's Avatar
 
Local Time: 14:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: on the corner of Peachtree and Peachtree
Posts: 30,698
Quote:
The liberal elite never, ever dominates. When it start doing so, it's not the liberal elite anymore.
I disagree. I think the liberal elite DOES dominate, but over its own sphere. It gets to have its own little place where it is King.

Quote:
There is absolutely no way you can say that a painting by David is more realistic than one from Pollock.
Realistic in what sense? I can say it is realistic because it looks more like real life.

Quote:
Embracing nature, or claiming you are, is necessarily denying it


Quote:
the sense that that it is being appropriated by a force, which is hijacking nature's true nature towards some goal.
The argument is that other societal groups are taking nature by force and our system brings us back to what nature intended. And there may not be some goal... not all systems are based on teleological philosophies.

Quote:
society forces an unnatural order to man, and in such cannot truly belong to man.
Perhaps, perhaps not. Many philosophers will talk about a state of nature which naturally results in man forming society. It is perhaps very natural indeed... an evolution of ideals.

Quote:
Why are you discussing this with me?
It's what I do.

Quote:
Do you agree or disagree that taking art for granted and linking it with emotional responses is being illiterate about it?
I don't know yet. I'll see when it comes time .
__________________
“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
- John 13:34-35 (NRSV)
Imran Siddiqui is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 21:11   #111
Wraith
Apolytoners Hall of Fame
King
 
Wraith's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Posts: 1,794
--"Finally, you have to keep in mind that it was only with the appearance of cartoons and cinema that art was destined directly for the masses."

Actually, Ukiyo-e, Japanese wood-block prints, were definitely meant for the masses. The earlier forms of Japanese art it's decended from are another matter; they're incredibly expensive, even today (a single painting in the traditional Japanese style can cost thousands of dollars just for the pigments). The wood-block prints, on the other hand, could be produced cheaply and in quantity, and were always meant to sell to the masses.

And yes, this was long before television or movies. ^_^

--"Pirates of the Caribbean is a brilliant movie that is far smarter than anyone has given it credit for."

You forgot the sarcasm tag...

Don't think I'm being snooty just because it's a movie. One of the best works of art I've seen in a while was a TV series (Haibane Renmei; incidentally involving one of my favorite artists, ABe yoshitoshi, who was trained in Classical Japanese painting styles). My problem with Pirates is because, in the words of Jay Sherman, "It stinks!".

--"Because art exists within a social context and aesthetic legacy. It is constantly redefining itself: it is proactively intellectual, and it requires constant reflexion. If you passively take X film and claim it is art- because it is, then you are using it in the false sense."

You got this from one of those comment generator pages, didn't you?
Oddly enough, half of this thread (on both sides) could have been written by an Eliza script. But that's true of most of the threads here ^_^

--"So instead of the usual one-upmanship that this site has slipped into, why don't you just start appreciating art for art's sake?"

Because this is Poly. Where would we be if people stopped the one-upmanship?

Wraith
Fine. No one understands you. That doesn't make you an artist.
Wraith is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 21:13   #112
Jaguar
C4DG Sarantium
Emperor
 
Jaguar's Avatar
 
Local Time: 14:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: New Haven, CT
Posts: 4,790
Quote:
Originally posted by Verto
Because the art I like is not the modern-throw-some-paint-at-canvas art.

I doubt anyone wants to talk about, say, Thomas Kinkade, since he's probably not considered avant garde by the psuedo-intellectuals.

That's actually really cool.

IMO about 5% of art is genuinely good, and the rest of them are hacks.
__________________
"You're the biggest user of hindsight that I've ever known. Your favorite team, in any sport, is the one that just won. If you were a woman, you'd likely be a slut." - Slowwhand, to Imran

Eschewing silly games since December 4, 2005
Jaguar is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 21:14   #113
Imran Siddiqui
staff
Apolytoners Hall of FameAge of Nations TeamPolyCast Team
 
Imran Siddiqui's Avatar
 
Local Time: 14:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: on the corner of Peachtree and Peachtree
Posts: 30,698
Quote:
My problem with Pirates is because, in the words of Jay Sherman, "It stinks!".
Snob! Pirates was an awesome movie .
__________________
“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
- John 13:34-35 (NRSV)
Imran Siddiqui is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 21:15   #114
Jaguar
C4DG Sarantium
Emperor
 
Jaguar's Avatar
 
Local Time: 14:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: New Haven, CT
Posts: 4,790
Pirates ruled! YAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!
__________________
"You're the biggest user of hindsight that I've ever known. Your favorite team, in any sport, is the one that just won. If you were a woman, you'd likely be a slut." - Slowwhand, to Imran

Eschewing silly games since December 4, 2005
Jaguar is offline  
Old March 3, 2004, 21:48   #115
Az
Emperor
 
Local Time: 21:38
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: A pub.
Posts: 3,161
I think this debate is futile. To me, everything which is aesthetically pleasing, is art. Especially so, if it's only purpose is to be aesthetically pleasing. For each era, and "school", however, I have different favourites.

If it is, all is great. If you don't like something, don't look at it, and don't buy it. It's your choice. Everyone can design their own houses, and make whatever art they want.

On the issue of Kinkade: From the posts I've seen here, and in other places, each and every person who has seriously dissed his painitings, showed himself to be an incredibly arrogant *****. I am quite ambivalent, myself, to his work, but I certainly will "not" degenerate this debate, and humiliate the people who like him, just because they like pictures of calmness and naivity. I think that kinkade's work is calming to the eye, and brings one to an era of childhood most of us will forever cherish, respect and love. OTOH, there is more to life than childhood's bliss.
__________________
urgh.NSFW
Az is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 14:38.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team