Wow!

[Buckyrig]

This is a great story. I need to find out more about this guy and his music. (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/africa/10/10/dougherty.rapper/index.html)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- When he was a little boy in Sudan, singer Emmanuel Jal's mother was killed. Soldiers raped his sister. At the age of 9, filled with longings for revenge, he became a child soldier.

"I had a lot of hatred, I had a lot of bitterness," he says.

But despite his beyond-brutal background, the dreadlocked Jal is gentle, almost shy. He's tall and skinny with a blinding smile.

As one of the "Lost Boys" of Sudan, he has traveled a road of pain many people cannot imagine, survived against all odds and come back to become an artist, rapping about those experiences.

"Music," he says, "it's the only thing that can enter your system, your mind, your heart, without your permission. And it's something that's a food for people's souls, and it heals."

His face turns serious: "If there's a situation and it didn't kill you at that moment and you managed to stand and overcome it," he says, "then it's going to be a blessing to you."

[LDahl]

Wow, is right. Wow.

[Buckyrig]

Homepage (http://www.emmanueljalonline.net/)

MySpace for tracks (http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=75486047)

The people who influence me the most are not musicians: Martin Luther King, Ghandi, Nelson Mandela, and Jesus Christ.

The artists that have played a part in my life are, Gospel Fathers (kenya), Dj Moz, The Grits, Nas, Bob Marley, The Winans Family, Roachie (my producer) Christ Aduor Moris Oyando, Ayak, DJ Josh...

I am still looking for others who can influence me. But the music I make at the moment is a tribute to the slaves that have been whipped, beaten, killed, raped and abused. They become strong with music that captures the world, and God willing music from the children of the slave culture, will spread a powerful message and put a stop to it.

[Scaleyinx]

Wow, very inspiring.

[Buckyrig]

Two year old Time Magazine article (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,901051003-1109296,00.html)

Did you know what you were fighting for? Yes. For freedom. Because the government of Sudan was oppressive. They brought in Shari'a law in Sudan, which means if you're not a Muslim you are considered an unbeliever and you don't get a good job. There was slavery; if you were black you were meant to be their servants. That's what I knew. When the SPLA [split into] factions, that's when I lost the motivation to fight for them, because we were fighting each other. So that's when we started to escape, where I was tempted to eat human beings, where I experienced God, because I asked god to help me in those terrible situations.

When did you start making music? In 2000 in church, because that's where there was hope. I looked at my life and I said, "I've been in hell and I'm told there's another. Why choose that when I have another option?" So I used to go to church and joined the gospel choir. We put on concerts in church and the school. Then I started to rap. People would come and watch. At first they resist, but then they like it. Rap was only just growing in Nairobi then. Now it is strong.

Do you find it ironic that rap music is often associated with guns and violence? I've seen those people. They have so much hatred and bitterness. A lot of them want to fight an enemy they can't see, so they end up being violent to anyone around. That's because they were slaves, in poverty and in a violent place. For me, I had the same violence, the same bitterness, but it changed. I was influenced by the Christian belief that you must forgive your enemy. But also by people like Nelson Mandela, he suffered so much but he still had to speak the word of peace and what he spoke is healing South Africa now. You have to give your enemy security, for them to trust you. Because they're insecure, they think you'll take what they have.


How did I miss this guy?

[dano]

S'funny; in creators comm. there's a thread about inspirational quotes which i could add nothing too. Word snippets rarely inspire me.

But when you get into stuff like this it really adds much more gravity and perspective to creative 'inspiration.' Getting back to the idea that LIFE fuels it; even if that life leads you to suffering you have the choice to turn lemons into lemonade or just handy objects to whip at people's heads.

[Biofungus]

Two year old Time Magazine article (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,901051003-1109296,00.html)






How did I miss this guy?
Spending 2 years on DW will do that to you... :p

[Buckyrig]

S'funny; in creators comm. there's a thread about inspirational quotes which i could add nothing too. Word snippets rarely inspire me.

But when you get into stuff like this it really adds much more gravity and perspective to creative 'inspiration.' Getting back to the idea that LIFE fuels it; even if that life leads you to suffering you have the choice to turn lemons into lemonade or just handy objects to whip at people's heads.

Yes.

What is the point of creation? What does it do for you? Why do other people care? Why should other people care?

More good stuff. (http://www.wfp.org/english/?ModuleID=137&Key=2595)

When I make music, I keep in mind some hungry tots … that’s what makes my music, my music. I put my hunger into my music.

The reason Africa is behind is because it is not educated. The corruption and the wars in Africa, they come because people are not educated. The only way to fight poverty is through education - so people know what they have. Education is enlightenment, triggering creativity.


The best thing one can do is invest in human life, physically or spiritually. Physically, to feed them, teach them how, and spiritually, to give them faith.

Personally, making music has helped me overcome my traumas; it’s healing. I started talking about my past in the past few years … It’s through the music that I deal with my past, using it to sacrifice my pride.

I’m still learning a lot. My mind is still empty. I’m listening to everything and not tired of learning.

[Buckyrig]

Review of collaboration with Muslim musician from two years ago. (http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/18/011236.php)

Ceasefire is stunning. This collaboration between Emmanuel Jal, a Christian from southern Sudan, and Abdel Gadir Salim, a Moslem from northern Sudan, sends a powerful message throughout the country in the shadow of war. For more than twenty years the Moslem north had battled the non-Moslem south until a peace agreement was reached earlier this year. Sudan's future, however, remains uncertain. Ceasefire is a powerful and symbolic cry for lasting peace that is urgently needed at this crucial moment in Sudan's history.

Unfortunately, problems persist...but stories like this are still great reminders of what people are capable of and the power of artistic expression.

Though most of the songs concern peace for Sudan, one stood out for its address of another urgent issue in Africa. 'Nyambol' tells the story of a young girl who suffers abuse and then escapes a forced marriage to ultimately achieve an education and become "an important person" and "important leader" in her village. The song showcases both Jal's rapping ability and his understanding that peace in Sudan, though extremely important, is just one of the many issues in Africa deserving the world's attention. He shows definite promise for being both a musical messiah and force for social change in the future.

[Buckyrig]

Some information (http://www.gatewayofafrica.com/artists/biography/214.html) on Abdel Gadir Salim.

Sudan is often called the bridge between Arabia and Africa, and Abdel Gair has taken it as his mission to fuse Arabic and African sounds of the country, taking musical scales and motifs from the former and wild percussion from the latter. The lyrics to his songs (he rarely writes the words himself) address any number of themes ranging from traditional love ballads to educational polemics, although he is always careful to avoid antagonizing the Islamic government.

[Buckyrig]

http://www.wasteyourlife.net/waste%20your%20life%20black%20and%20white.jpg

[Buckyrig]

Jal speaking about Amnesty International's Control Arms (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFkBV2bktIw&mode=related&search=)

Still researching this one myself...but interesting.

[Buckyrig]

Would it help if I said he was the new X-Men artist?

[Knuckles]

No, but if he married a robot, everybody would be all over it.

[dano]

Hey! Put your blindfold back on!

[Buckyrig]

Jaded eyes see clearly, but only half of what's there.


Are you guys happy now?

You've got me quoting punk rock lyrics and I'm actually serious this time. :man:

[Mike225]

The new X-Men artist is from Sudan? That's awesome!

[MattWaterman]

See, this shit pisses me right the hell off.

Let me explain: 10-15 years ago **I** had that hope for art, for it's ability to transform. I used to listen to music and really feel what was being conveyed; I used to awe at turns of a phrase in literature and great storytelling in movies. Nowadays, I look at music and see marketing machines, I worry about split-infinitives in my writing, and I am legitimately surprised if I can't predict the ending to a movie within the first 15 minutes of said movie. It's not simple jadedness at work---I can't help but feel like it's a certain loss of hope, as dramatic as that may sound.

The fact that this guy can get through such tragedy and still find himself in his art is fucking phenomenal. As "great" as we have it in the west (and believe me, I am no romantic yearning for 'the good old days'; I like my microwave) there's things like this that point out how much the arts are needed and how spoiled/jaded I've become...

[Buckyrig]

The fact that this guy can get through such tragedy and still find himself in his art is fucking phenomenal. As "great" as we have it in the west (and believe me, I am no romantic yearning for 'the good old days'; I like my microwave) there's things like this that point out how much the arts are needed and how spoiled/jaded I've become...

Thank you...kind of what I thought this should have sparked from the beginning - if not at least a discussion about positives from a negative.



Hell...it's so fucking easy to be cynical and jaded...lazy. Well...then what's the point of writing, drawing, making music, storytelling what have you?

Because frankly, if all you have to bring back from the creative void to your audience is meaningless despair...what use are you and your art?

And also, in that case...where does everyone get off ridiculing emo and goth kids? I fail to see a difference aside from the theatrics.

[MattWaterman]

Because frankly, if all you have to bring back from the creative void to your audience is meaningless despair...what use are you and your art?


Well, I'd be careful there. Some of the most touching, favorite-est stuff in my life has been the likes of Nine Inch Nails, Samual Beckett, and Six Feet Under, none of which is exactly happy-go-lucky. I know you're not insinuating that that's all art should be; I give you more credit than that. I just think it's a slippery slope to define what art should be in any way other than that it should be authentic. This guy used art gloriously to get through / come to grips with the horror he had seen; Kafka produced dreary, inspired imaginations from his dreary life. Both used their creativity to produce something more than everyday existence...

[Buckyrig]

I'm trying to instigate...something here.

There's a lot of wallowing in darkness without point. That's the key...without point. If you take up my time with your work only to inform me that the world is sad and/or screwed up...well, I got news for you. Most of us knew that when we woke up in the morning. There needs to be some sort of exploration beyond that. Now, maybe you can tell that empty story with a high level of artifice...well then it will justify its existence, yes. But the work will lack the depth that makes something live.

I can only address Beckett with significant knowledge. But he was in fact trying to illustrate to his audience how what we accept as normal is in fact insanity. (Yes, very simplified. But it shows how it has a purpose.)

I want to see pursuit.

[dano]

I'm trying to instigate...something here.

There's a lot of wallowing in darkness without point. That's the key...without point. If you take up my time with your work only to inform me that the world is sad and/or screwed up....
I'm a little confused, do you mean life wallowing or art wallowing?
The original article was about a guy who chose to not just let his world suck him in and made positive(?) art from his suffering.

[Buckyrig]

Matt was responding to my challenge to the "Void" here in the face of what the original post represents.

And I was referring to art wallowing. And it was put out there as a contrast.

I'm just confused as to the voracity with which horrible shit is explored here...but something like this...which even lends itself to some sort of 'art discussion' lies dormant.

[MattWaterman]

I'm a little confused, do you mean life wallowing or art wallowing?
The original article was about a guy who chose to not just let his world suck him in and made positive(?) art from his suffering.

At the risk of putting words in Bucky's mouth, I think he's referring to the comparative easiness and particularly the over-abundance of art that is nothing more that the wallowing of the artist. How that stuff just doesn't resonate given that, yeah, everyone already knows life is crap. And he was using this gentleman as proof of art that can be made out tragedy (as opposed to wallowing that is born from relative boredom). My only point was that it was a slippery slope to define art in any sort of way. Yeah, to take it to the extreme, the gothy kids who write "Life Sucks" in lipstick on a mirror while calling it 'art' are a dime a dozen. But on the other hand, some of the dark stuff I mentioned (Beckett, Kafka) can stand next to some of the greatest stuff every made...

Did I get that right?

[dano]

I'm just confused as to the voracity .

Maybe it's a human urge to 'fix'
You see an outrage with no solution so you carry on about it as if to fix it.
Where as in this situation the guy had horror, but he fixed it himself so no need to find interest in it.

[Buckyrig]

Did I get that right?

Pretty much.

I'm trying to be provocative without being an ass here though...just to get a dialogue.

Maybe it's a human urge to 'fix'
You see an outrage with no solution so you carry on about it as if to fix it.
Where as in this situation the guy had horror, but he fixed it himself so no need to find interest in it.

But don't you need these examples to keep moving forward?

And a lot of what goes on in some other discussions is of the "life sucks/is not fair, we're all gonna die anyway" variety.

Plus I think there is a general perception problem about just how intensely the world is allegedly burning.

[dano]

I suppose that gets into a whole other discussion about peoples perspective on life; how that begins to affect larger scale things.
I've ranted before about Westerners living in luxury and having no perspective on what suffering or strife is. Perhaps to your point, look at this guy's history.
The endurance level for strife lowers as we become more materialistic and submerged in our luxury culture.

[Buckyrig]

I was conscripted into a paramilitary organization when I was eight. So, I can completely understand where this guy is coming from.

It was creepy. We wore these neckerchiefs and had these sew-on patches and the people in charge were obsessed with forcing us to race little wooden cars.

After two months of that torture, I was a changed man and went AWOL.


Gives me shivers just thinking about it now.

[Nick Kerklaan]

Thanks for posting this, it is very inspiring. Great music, too.

[Nick Kerklaan]

There's a lot of wallowing in darkness without point. That's the key...without point. If you take up my time with your work only to inform me that the world is sad and/or screwed up...well, I got news for you. Most of us knew that when we woke up in the morning. There needs to be some sort of exploration beyond that. Now, maybe you can tell that empty story with a high level of artifice...well then it will justify its existence, yes. But the work will lack the depth that makes something live.

I really think that if an artist's personal viewpoint/belief is that the world is sad/screwed up, like he/she isn't just trying to be "dark" or "edgey" because that's what in, but that's genuinely how they see the world, then that's what should come across in their art. I may not agree with what they're saying, but I can at least respect it. The only thing I really don't respect in art is dishonesty. Everything else is just a matter of taste and personal viewpoint.

[Newt]

I was conscripted into a paramilitary organization when I was eight. So, I can completely understand where this guy is coming from.

It was creepy. We wore these neckerchiefs and had these sew-on patches and the people in charge were obsessed with forcing us to race little wooden cars.

After two months of that torture, I was a changed man and went AWOL.


Gives me shivers just thinking about it now.

You deserted from the scouts? Don't worry, if you go back and beg forgiveness, I'm sure they'll suspend sentencing. Maybe they'll even take you on a nice snipe hunt.

[Buckyrig]

I really think that if an artist's personal viewpoint/belief is that the world is sad/screwed up, like he/she isn't just trying to be "dark" or "edgey" because that's what in, but that's genuinely how they see the world, then that's what should come across in their art. I may not agree with what they're saying, but I can at least respect it. The only thing I really don't respect in art is dishonesty.

See...I think complacency is an issue too. To take such a narrow view of things is fine when you're still developing. But there is this affection...this weird pride in some sort of knowledge regarding despondency that is in fact a lack thereof.

I just think it's funny that we concentrate on reflecting how bad things are and not exploring much further than that far too often.

I'm really just throwing this thread out there as a challenge...and hopefully an inspiration. It works independent of 'art' as well...I just figure on this board that that is a natural tributary to take.

Everything else is just a matter of taste and personal viewpoint.

And yet this thread goes largely ignored. It seems to indicate - at least in this small corner of the world - disproportionate leanings.

:)

[Nick Kerklaan]

See...I think complacency is an issue too. To take such a narrow view of things is fine when you're still developing. But there is this affection...this weird pride in some sort of knowledge regarding despondency that is in fact a lack thereof.

I just think it's funny that we concentrate on reflecting how bad things are and not exploring much further than that far too often.
I see what you're saying, but I think it's also kind of taking a narrow view of things to assume that having a relatively negative viewpoint automatically means you have a narrow vew of things. I don't really see any more or less virtue in a positive or negative world view. I know personally I'd rather have the former, because it makes me happier to see the good in things and rise above the bad. But it's only what works for me.

Also, I think if I were to closely examine all my favourite works of art across various media, I'd see them running strongly toward the "darker" or more down edge, or at least not overly happy and feel-good. I think this vibes with a Nick Cave quote I read somewhere that said something like, paraphrasing, "Overwhelming negativity is more interesting than overwhelming positivity". I think that holds true for me, and judging by the popularity of the dark, edgey, and despondent, it holds true for a lot of people.


I'm really just throwing this thread out there as a challenge...and hopefully an inspiration. It works independent of 'art' as well...I just figure on this board that that is a natural tributary to take.

And it goes back to what was, (I assume) your original impetus for posting, the discovery of Emmanuel Jai, his story and music. In this case, he used the horrors he's experienced in his life to fuel music that is (from what I gather after a few listens on Myspace anyway) joyous, celebratory, and hopeful, while still fueled by the emotion of what he's experienced in his life. But would his art be any less credible or have less meaning if it was instead overwhelmingly bleak? It could certainly have cause to be. It would be a different sort of vibe, for sure, but if that's really how he felt, it would still be true to what he's trying to say. Of course, it's evident that it isn't, and so his music sounds like it does. That's what I was getting at, about "honesty" in art.

[Buckyrig]

I see what you're saying, but I think it's also kind of taking a narrow view of things to assume that having a relatively negative viewpoint automatically means you have a narrow vew of things. I don't really see any more or less virtue in a positive or negative world view. I know personally I'd rather have the former, because it makes me happier to see the good in things and rise above the bad. But it's only what works for me.

Here's the thing...you say relatively. I do feel there is an overabundance of nearly nihilistic viewpoints that are embraced as deep...when it is actually pretty far from deep as it evidences at best naivete...and at worst a dishonesty (to address one of your points), latent or not.

And it goes back to what was, (I assume) your original impetus for posting, the discovery of Emmanuel Jai, his story and music. In this case, he used the horrors he's experienced in his life to fuel music that is (from what I gather after a few listens on Myspace anyway) joyous, celebratory, and hopeful, while still fueled by the emotion of what he's experienced in his life. But would his art be any less credible or have less meaning if it was instead overwhelmingly bleak? It could certainly have cause to be. It would be a different sort of vibe, for sure, but if that's really how he felt, it would still be true to what he's trying to say. Of course, it's evident that it isn't, and so his music sounds like it does. That's what I was getting at, about "honesty" in art.

I don't know that I was looking at positivity per se (though it's refreshing sometimes in a sea of narcissistic despair) so much as the purposefulness of what he is doing.

I'm not even saying people need to be like him...but the situation screams for respect and admiration. But a cranky and cynical nihilist will always get more respect.

Bear in mind that these are extremes...but I think it is nicely illustrative.

Myself on the other hand...I have a hard time interpreting my intentions into words that amount to much more than gibberish sometimes.

[Nick Kerklaan]

Here's the thing...you say relatively. I do feel there is an overabundance of nearly nihilistic viewpoints that are embraced as deep...when it is actually pretty far from deep as it evidences at best naivete...and at worst a dishonesty (to address one of your points), latent or not.

Hm. I don't know, "deep" is all in how you see it. I really don't think it's my place to dismiss anyone's viewpoint as naive, and I'd have to be psychic to know if it was dishonest or not (The more I think about it the more I'm realizing honest and dishonest aren't quite the right words but I'm not smart enough to articulate it better than that).

That said, I do kind of agree with you, but I think it goes back to the whole thing about negativity being more interesting, possibly not just as regards art but as regards life. I agree with you in that I think a lot of people tend to equate "deep" with some sort of "life is shit" worldview. How honestly any one person believes that or whether such a viewpoint is on the money or not isn't my place to say, but I do see the prevalnce of it, and in my more cynical moments I think it's mostly just people trying to seem more interesting than they actually are. But in my better moments I try to see things more objectively.

I don't know that I was looking at positivity per se (though it's refreshing sometimes in a sea of narcissistic despair) so much as the purposefulness of what he is doing.

I'm not even saying people need to be like him...but the situation screams for respect and admiration. But a cranky and cynical nihilist will always get more respect.

See, I think that's being kind of cynical. It's not necesarily true. Not everyone is a cranky and cynical nihilist, and not everyone is going to respect one more than someone like Jai. And also, I think it's easy to seem purposeful coming from a background like his with a message like he has. Which isn't to diminish what he's been through or what he's doing now, but I just don't think it's fair to say that what he's doing is necesarily more true than what someone else does just because of where he's coming from.

Myself on the other hand...I have a hard time interpreting my intentions into words that amount to much more than gibberish sometimes.

Yeah, I know what you mean. For instance, in this thread, I don't know that I'm quite getting across everything I mean in quite the way I want to, but hopefully the gist is there.

Thanks for this thread, it's really made me think.

[Nick Kerklaan]

Man, I'm so stupid, I can't believe I kept calling him "Emmanuel Jai". I meant Jal.

[MattWaterman]

I don't know that I was looking at positivity per se (though it's refreshing sometimes in a sea of narcissistic despair) so much as the purposefulness of what he is doing.



Not to unnessecarily cloud the issue, but it bears mentioning that a pure, even divide between "positivity in art" and "negativity in art" isn't exactly possible really, either. Take Kurt Vonnegut. Some people find his work to be ridiculously bleak or depressing. Myself, I always found a ray of hope in all of it, an undercurrent that continued despite the bleakness. In his own way, the same can be said of Samuel Beckett ("I cannot go on. I must go on.")

Contrapositively, (and I'm quite aware it's trite; I just can't think of a better example this early in the morning), Billy Corigan tried to commit suicide the day after writing, "Today." So who the hell knows.

[Newt]

Not to unnessecarily cloud the issue, but it bears mentioning that a pure, even divide between "positivity in art" and "negativity in art" isn't exactly possible really, either. Take Kurt Vonnegut. Some people find his work to be ridiculously bleak or depressing. Myself, I always found a ray of hope in all of it, an undercurrent that continued despite the bleakness. In his own way, the same can be said of Samuel Beckett ("I cannot go on. I must go on.")

Contrapositively, (and I'm quite aware it's trite; I just can't think of a better example this early in the morning), Billy Corigan tried to commit suicide the day after writing, "Today." So who the hell knows.

'Today' is about suicide; the chorus is ironic. Just like Pearl Jam's 'Alive' is about a murderer talking to his mother. The two most uplifting songs of the '90's!

Bucky's got a point that negativity is in fashion these days, but that's all it is: a fashion. It's not the eternal human condition, so don't get too worked up over it. Now shallowness- that's forever!

[Buckyrig]

Take Kurt Vonnegut. Some people find his work to be ridiculously bleak or depressing. Myself, I always found a ray of hope in all of it, an undercurrent that continued despite the bleakness.

Anyone who doesn't see that really doesn't know how to read very well.


Again, I'm trying to push some buttons and cause something to develop here...but "life sucks...and that's as far as I got when I created this work" is pretty lame no matter how you want to cut it.

[MattWaterman]

Again, I'm trying to push some buttons and cause something to develop here...but "life sucks...and that's as far as I got when I created this work" is pretty lame no matter how you want to cut it.


Wel......sure. I think we can all agree there...

[Buckyrig]

Wel......sure. I think we can all agree there...

Oh yeah... :mad: :happy:

[FA]

*raises hand* I disagree.

[Mike225]

..surly.

[Toyandgadgetguy]

Malcontent, even.

[Buckyrig]

http://www.leasecure.com/images/keys.jpg

*jingle jingle*

[Buckyrig]

OK!

But does someone disagree?

Seriously.

[Nick Kerklaan]

but "life sucks...and that's as far as I got when I created this work" is pretty lame no matter how you want to cut it.

I kind of disagree, for reasons I already mostly explained.

Yes, maybe it's lame from my perspective, but who am I to judge where anyone else was coming from? If I don't dig what a work of art has to say, I find a different one. No use dwelling on stuff I don't like.

[Buckyrig]

As a member of the audience? Sure.

But as a creative person, isn't dissecting this kind of thing good exercise?

[Nick Kerklaan]

Maybe, but I'd almost rather disect things I do like, figure out why they worked for me, that sort of thing.

You do have a point though. Do you have any examples of the sort of thing you're talking about, like specific works?

[Buckyrig]

I guess have been speaking in vagaries, huh?

Give me some time...I'll try to get up a good, known, example later on.

I'd rather not surf livejournal for goth poetry. :har:

[Mike225]

I'd rather not surf livejournal for goth poetry. :har:I'm sure there are plenty of examples on your harddrive.

[Buckyrig]

Of goth poetry or bad writing?

[Mike225]

Goth.

[Buckyrig]

You're confusing me with Waterman.

[Mike225]

:laugh:

[MattWaterman]

:rolleyes: :yawn:

Pfft. Conformists...

http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/3474/0042545vr6.jpg

[Buckyrig]

It's just a jump to the left

:huh:

[Buckyrig]

Maybe, but I'd almost rather disect things I do like, figure out why they worked for me, that sort of thing.

You do have a point though. Do you have any examples of the sort of thing you're talking about, like specific works?

Bah...didn't have a chance to really consider this. Seems I am responding more to the unbalanced behaviors I see amongst people I've run into in creative circles. I'll come up with something though. ;)

In the meantime, as Jal even somewhat alluded to, let's throw up Gangster Rap. While I am the first to admit a value in describing a situation with which many people are unfamiliar, the concept as a whole - and with exception of course - seems to more often be a nihilistic description of situation, and nothing more, and to no discernable end.





If you don't count the giant bags of cash. ;)

[Buckyrig]

I still can't think of anything that would be an immediately and easily recognizable work...hmm... :sure:



I give up...what's the point anyway?

[Nick Kerklaan]

To have a discussion and stuff? I dunno. It's no biggie that you can't think of anything specific, it doesn't invalidate your point or anything.

I mostly agree with you on gangster rap, I can't think of anything particularly insightful to say by way of debate other than "it depends on your perspective".

[MattWaterman]

I don't want to put words in your mouth, Bucky, but I was thinking about this whole big ball of wax more and I think I might have found the source of your...enneu.

It's a matter of validity. There's an undercurrent in the arts that somehow, someway negativity makes pieces more vital. The way I think we can verify this is the respective ways negative and positive art (for lack of a better expression) are recieved, particularly less talented stuff. If some goth-y college student writes about, "The waves of despair / Rolling over her heart," it's still celebrated even as many know it's fairly trite. However, if some upbeat, cheerleader type writes about, "The waves of joy / Rolling over my heart," it's scorned, even laughed at. There's not an even playing field at work and it almost encourges people to produce this self-flagellation stuff rather than risking something more positive.

I'm aware that's only one leg of this elephant (to borrow form the blind men-elephant analogy) but I think it's a valid one in regard to your particular issue. I mean, at bare bones, people are prone to writing negative stuff because we're all self-involved, scared and lonely little humans. But...outside of that... I get the feeling that 'the establishment' may encourage it as well.

[Newt]

I think you're exactly right, Matt, except in stating that this is some part of the human condition; the acceptance of negativity as depth is a current phenomenon. If you look at other periods of history you can find times when emphasis on joy and triumph was considered to be where true art lay, and negative works were scorned as the work of whiners. This is true of Medeival European works, for example.

[down21]

But most of great Western art was created by 'tortured' privileged men, Byron or Beethoven for example. Isn't it pretty much accepted that artists have their demons. It's almost de rigueur to be the tortured artist isn't it?
I think the preraphaelites were mocked for being so sunny.

I paint what I like to paint but with writing you can do more. This awful story I've been working on forever was originally just meant as a diversion but who really needs more crap out there? So I decided it should have a point at least and I restructured it to include my politics, especially considering the way things are now. (so now it still sucks but it's also preachy)
The point is I'd love to read something like that only written by someone smart who knows how to write. Not a diversion but a story that is enlightening regarding today's mess. The way Orwell wrote Animal Farm as a diversion for his son but then made it mean something. (did I hear that here?)
If there is a comic like that that addresses today's issues I'd be interested.

I love goth but I hate My Chemical Romance and that kind of thing. It isn't the melodrama that bothers me it's the artifice. Like Thomas Kincaide's hearts or flags. If it's authentic, if it comes from a genuine place then even Margaret Keane doesn't bother me.

Too funny

[MattWaterman]

I think you're exactly right, Matt, except in stating that this is some part of the human condition; the acceptance of negativity as depth is a current phenomenon. If you look at other periods of history you can find times when emphasis on joy and triumph was considered to be where true art lay, and negative works were scorned as the work of whiners. This is true of Medeival European works, for example.


Yeah, you're right--I think I cast too wide of a net with that comment. Though I will say, Mideavil times were more about the morality play (to my knowledge) and furthering the church's agenda, you are definitly right about the negativity part.

Thinking this through one more step, then, does it seem like this rise in negativity coincided with the rise in realism in the mid/late nineteenth century? And how does this relate to the rise in the mass availability of the novel...? It seems to come back to our standard of living again...

[Newt]

I think the negativity in art was what survived when Romanticism and Realism collided in the nineteenth century, and then were pared down by the horror of the World Wars.

The two 'tortured artists' Down21 mentioned were both Romantics of the haunted melancholy mold, but the Romantic movement also produced the joyful nature-worship and bohemianism of Thoreau and Gaugin, for example, and Realism produced the cheerful misanthropy of Dickens and Twain as well as the grim stories of Sinclair and Dostoevsky.

The wars changed everything, though. Most of the art produced in the period between the wars was either total escape into formalist piddling and fantasy (Abstract Expressionism, Heroic Fantasy, etc.), or was an attempt to deal with a world that could accomodate the deaths of millions on the battlefield for no real reason (Dada, Existentialism, etc.) The same trend continued after WWII, except that it became more of a free-style scene without well-defined schools. There have been attempts to re-inject positivity into art, and they have, I believe, been at least partially successful; the 'scene' is overall not as concentrated on formalism and absurdity as it was a few decades back.

[MattWaterman]

Not a diversion but a story that is enlightening regarding today's mess. The way Orwell wrote Animal Farm as a diversion for his son but then made it mean something. (did I hear that here?)
If there is a comic like that that addresses today's issues I'd be interested.



And see, you've hit on another important issue that we've barely spoken about: The audience itself. We talk up and down about the vitality of "positive" vs. "negative" art (again for lack of a better description), but the realities of the market can be even more important. Like the aforementioned Morality Plays, it barely came downn to what the artist wanted---it was up to his (not her ;) fiancer, the church.

Nowadays, we have almost a clear demarcation between 'entertainment' and 'serious art' (hell, Graham Greene even listed his respective works in the two categories). In many cases Bucky you can have all the bright and shiny happy endings you want.....in a Michael Crichton novel. But good luck finding any of that in, say, most 'literary fiction'.

I'm not sure where this line of thought takes us, I just think it's an important point she brought up...

[Buckyrig]

Everyone glossed over my joke. :sure:

And see, you've hit on another important issue that we've barely spoken about: The audience itself. We talk up and down about the vitality of "positive" vs. "negative" art (again for lack of a better description), but the realities of the market can be even more important. Like the aforementioned Morality Plays, it barely came downn to what the artist wanted---it was up to his (not her ;) fiancer, the church.

I still maintain there is an audience for most anything. But also, while someone might appreciate the artifice of skillfully describing despair...they probably take little away from it other than, "you got that right." Nick Kerklaan says that it is all valid. I'm not necessarily arguing that it's not...just that I believe there is a question of whether form alone is significant enough to warrant high praise. And if so, does it in fact need to be an ostensibly new expression of sorts?

Nowadays, we have almost a clear demarcation between 'entertainment' and 'serious art' (hell, Graham Greene even listed his respective works in the two categories). In many cases Bucky you can have all the bright and shiny happy endings you want.....in a Michael Crichton novel. But good luck finding any of that in, say, most 'literary fiction'.

Where's that line between entertainment and literature? Because, like your earlier example, I think that Vonnegut is ultimately positive...or at least hopeful.

Maybe it's "art as exorcism" vs "art as exploration"...?

I'm not sure where this line of thought takes us, I just think it's an important point she brought up...

Sure enough.

And I'm glad there is actually some activity down here and it is drawing a few new people here and there...but...WOW...this last page or so may have made the discussion largely impenetrable. Friggin' nerds. :laugh:


I did come up with a half-assed, clunky example. The movie Swimming With Sharks with Frank Whaley and Kevin Spacey. I enjoyed this movie when I had first seen it years ago...but something about it always seemed incomplete...or something. Looking back (personally) I see that there was a lot of interesting and entertaining elements in the telling of the story...but the utter unrepentant and really unexplained nihilism in the film's statement leaves the whole thing hanging hollow. A well-constructed "snap shot" of something...and little else...maybe a sensationalist ending.

Half-formed thought there...enjoy. :)

I can also say that maybe my inability to single out any well-known or respected piece lends credence to my supposition...but I'm not running for office, so we won't really play that game. :whistlin:

:laugh:

[Buckyrig]

But most of great Western art was created by 'tortured' privileged men,

Kind of a problem, don't you think? I mean, the reality of the world being - and having been - what it is, it makes sense.

But when you consider that for all the connecting threads of humanity...no two people are the same - and even more so, no two groups of people are the same - there is a mass of missing - or possibly ignored - valid, and in fact vital, work that has been ignored for some kind of snobbery or congruent factor.


Crap...I'm going to spiral off into gibberish again...let's leave it at that for now. :blink:

[FA]

OK!

But does someone disagree?

Seriously.

Yep. Seriously.

If a piece of art was the complete picture or the full story then you might have a point, but that's just not how it works. If it were, people would have learned everything they were going to learn and said everything they wanted to say after creating one piece.

The only way it's lame to create something that boils down to 'life sucks' is if you subsequently never create anything else. Everyone has their 'fuck this' periods - it's a necessary stage on the journey towards the realisation of how fortunate we are. And I don't mean new truck and running water fortunate - I mean "whoah....my existence is pretty fucking improbable" fortunate.

Creating art is as much about working out what you want to say as it is saying it.

And just to be inflammatory, let me ask this. Why are you more disappointed by people who see some of the terrible facets of life and paint a picture or write a song or (etc etc) that expresses that than you seem to be by a young man who has seen some of the terrible facets of life and deals with that by taking up a gun and killing people.

[Buckyrig]

Creating art is as much about working out what you want to say as it is saying it.

But why do I care? I have reams of shit that doesn't get shown to anyone...because it's the bad crap that worked out of my system. And it is garbage. To say that any expression whatsoever is valid, is to regard the artist/author...not to the potential audience. Shit...most people barely want to hear their own friends' and family's problems...why do I want to experience the mewling of some distant stranger with nothing to give me but complaints?

And just to be inflammatory, let me ask this. Why are you more disappointed by people who see some of the terrible facets of life and paint a picture or write a song or (etc etc) that expresses that than you seem to be by a young man who has seen some of the terrible facets of life and deals with that by taking up a gun and killing people.

A) Nine years old
B) Not an artist...probably not even of the temperament yet either.
C) With obvious exception, I don't judge pasts. Especially with regards to artists.
D) Nine years old

[FA]

But why do I care? I have reams of shit that doesn't get shown to anyone...because it's the bad crap that worked out of my system. And it is garbage. To say that any expression whatsoever is valid, is to regard the artist/author...not to the potential audience. Shit...most people barely want to hear their own friends' and family's problems...why do I want to experience the mewling of some distant stranger with nothing to give me but complaints?

If you're only creating art for an audience, are you creating art or are you just writing a cosmic advertisement for yourself? The way I see it is this - you (that's a non-specific you - all the you's in this post are) investigate the world and yourself by creating something. That process in itself is a self-contained and concrete thing. If an audience then come along after the fact and interact in some way with your creation -whether they're noting its shortcomings or recognising an emotion or sparking a thought - that is something else. a is art and a+b is art.

Saying somebody has to appreciate something you create for the creation to be valid is ass-backwards. Kinda reminds me of corporate sexual harassment policies where your intention is unimportant - if somebody feels uncomfortable then you are guilty.

Interaction with an audience is important, but it's a bonus, not the point.

why do I want to experience the mewling of some distant stranger with nothing to give me but complaints?

Nobody is saying you have to. It's not about you. It's about the artist. If they're not meeting your needs - good, maybe that will be enough of a push for you to become an artist yourself.

[Newt]

In defense of sad-sack misery-laden nihilistic nonsense: the Smashing Pumpkins are probably the most important reason I never (successfully) killed myself when I was a teenager. Sometimes it helps to have a little company.

[Buckyrig]

Saying somebody has to appreciate something you create for the creation to be valid is ass-backwards.

What is the point of art unappreciated though.

It is valid to say that one should start by creating what one feels led to create by whatever pseudo-mystical balderdash to which we will attribute such things, but if it never strikes a meaningful chord in another human being it becomes therapy.

Nothing wrong with that...but should that be the focus of Art in the larger sense?

[Newt]

Communication is part of the definition of art; if you fail to communicate you have not made art.

[MattWaterman]

If you're only creating art for an audience, are you creating art or are you just writing a cosmic advertisement for yourself? The way I see it is this - you (that's a non-specific you - all the you's in this post are) investigate the world and yourself by creating something. That process in itself is a self-contained and concrete thing. If an audience then come along after the fact and interact in some way with your creation -whether they're noting its shortcomings or recognising an emotion or sparking a thought - that is something else. a is art and a+b is art.



This is dissolving into that crazy, zany slope of "what is art" again but it reminds me of a parable/very subtle joke I heard a long time ago that really impressed me. There was this monk who would slave over his poems, crafting them to utter, complete perfection....and then he would toss them into the river, unread. Someone asked him why he would do such a thing and he responded, simply, that he "was done with it."

In that case, definitionally, the process is more important than the product. And while this is clearly, clearly my opinion, I firmly believe that to be true. Ostensibley, my goal remains to get one of my novels / one of my future novels published, of course. But if asked ahead of time, would I still have spent all that time writing them even if I knew ahead of time they would never be published? Yes, I believe I would.

[Buckyrig]

In defense of sad-sack misery-laden nihilistic nonsense: the Smashing Pumpkins are probably the most important reason I never (successfully) killed myself when I was a teenager. Sometimes it helps to have a little company.

Ok, this is a good point.

But doesn't it become somewhat dangerous too? In this specific case. Couldn't a reinforcement of nihilism...a validation of your despondent world view...throw you over the precipice?

Nebulous.

[Buckyrig]

But if asked ahead of time, would I still have spent all that time writing them even if I knew ahead of time they would never be published? Yes, I believe I would.

Yeah...but that can also be attributed to creatively inclined people being bat shit nuts. :har:

[FA]

What is the point of art unappreciated though.

It is valid to say that one should start by creating what one feels led to create by whatever pseudo-mystical balderdash to which we will attribute such things, but if it never strikes a meaningful chord in another human being it becomes therapy.

Nothing wrong with that...but should that be the focus of Art in the larger sense?

Creation is pretty demanding. The very act of getting whatever is inside you out changes you. Nobody has to appreciate anything for that to happen.

What baffles me is the unspoken acceptance of the idea that the artist can only interact with others and not with himself. Even if I thought a creation had to be appreciated to be valid (I don't but hey) then so long as the creator appreciated it, job done. The artist before creation and the artist after creation, standing back and looking at his work, are two different people. They have to be.

Should that be the focus of art? I don't know. But it is.

[MattWaterman]

Ok, this is a good point.

But doesn't it become somewhat dangerous too? In this specific case. Couldn't a reinforcement of nihilism...a validation of your despondent world view...throw you over the precipice?



Tipper?

:nyah: :laugh:

[Buckyrig]

Creation is pretty demanding. The very act of getting whatever is inside you out changes you. Nobody has to appreciate anything for that to happen.

What baffles me is the unspoken acceptance of the idea that the artist can only interact with others and not with himself. Even if I thought a creation had to be appreciated to be valid (I don't but hey) then so long as the creator appreciated it, job done. The artist before creation and the artist after creation, standing back and looking at his work, are two different people. They have to be.

Should that be the focus of art? I don't know. But it is.

Narcissistic, don't you think?

(Self-involved at the very least.)

Not that there isn't a "god" aspect in all creation.

[Buckyrig]

Tipper?

:nyah: :laugh:

You don't think indulging in a cyclical behavior like that can affect your mind?

[FA]

Communication is part of the definition of art; if you fail to communicate you have not made art.

Pffft. If I utter a sentence in a room full of deaf people, it's not my fault it goes unheard.

[FA]

Narcissistic, don't you think?

(Self-involved at the very least.)

Not that there isn't a "god" aspect in all creation.

Maybe. But what's wrong with narcissism?

[FA]

In that case, definitionally, the process is more important than the product. And while this is clearly, clearly my opinion, I firmly believe that to be true. Ostensibley, my goal remains to get one of my novels / one of my future novels published, of course. But if asked ahead of time, would I still have spent all that time writing them even if I knew ahead of time they would never be published? Yes, I believe I would.

Yes. Agreed.

[Buckyrig]

Maybe. But what's wrong with narcissism?

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/images/campmap.jpg

:laugh: :laugh:

[Buckyrig]

Has anyone seen The Good Girl with Jake Gyllenhaal and Jennifer Aniston? Gyllenhaal's character seems to be an example of one aspect of what I am thinking about I suppose. :)

[FA]

:yawn:

[Buckyrig]

Oh...you set that right up for me!

Look in the mirror if you want to blame someone. :laugh:

[Newt]

Ok, this is a good point.

But doesn't it become somewhat dangerous too? In this specific case. Couldn't a reinforcement of nihilism...a validation of your despondent world view...throw you over the precipice?

Nebulous.

That depends on what the audience is looking for; the audience is not a passive receiver of art. The violence and heart-breaking cruelty of Greek tragedy, and likewise the crudity, silliness, and nastiness of Greek comedy, were intended as catharsis- a socially acceptable way of indulging one's natural propensity for feeling disruptive emotions, thus cleansing one of these emotions. Other audiences may be looking for formal perfection, for clever artifice, or for raging emotion; the attitude of the participant is every bit as important as the attitude of the artist or the tone of the artwork.

Besides, any successful piece of art has the potential to either reinforce or change a person's feelings or views; it is very difficult to predict whether this process will result in improvement or decline in that person's quality of life or quality as a human being overall. A work that reinforces a person's unrelentingly upbeat viewpoint can lead to that person ignoring problems that he can change, while a massively negative work may cause a negative person to see the error of his ways. You just never know.

[Buckyrig]

In that case, what's the point?

I give up.

[Buckyrig]

Who wants to invade Utah with me?

[Newt]

Pffft. If I utter a sentence in a room full of deaf people, it's not my fault it goes unheard.

If communication is your intent, you must take the nature of your audience into consideration.

There is a balancing point here; if you make create something entirely for yourself, it has no value for anyone else; if you create something entirely for your audience, you have brought nothing unique to it. Art, in any meaningful definition of the term, must be an interaction between creator and audience.

[FA]

If communication is your intent, you must take the nature of your audience into consideration.

There is a balancing point here; if you make create something entirely for yourself, it has no value for anyone else; if you create something entirely for your audience, you have brought nothing unique to it. Art, in any meaningful definition of the term, must be an interaction between creator and audience.

Again, why does the creator not count as the audience?

[Newt]

In that case, what's the point?

I give up.

The point is not to make people feel what you want them to feel, it's just to prod them into responding. You, as a creator, are giving the audience a device; it's up to them to decide what to do with it.

[Newt]

Again, why does the creator not count as the audience?

If the creator is the only audience you care about, then that's fine. But don't bother trying to interest others in the work, as it will be intrinsically uninteresting to them.

[Buckyrig]

Again, why does the creator not count as the audience?

Ok...this falls into my belief that everyone should - and probably does - create some art. All humans should be amateur artists of some form. (We won't get into the criminality of making a living as an artist and the severance from most anything of relatable value when you're enveloped in an unnatural life circumstance.) Everyone should explore. But the world needs to share ideas. For everyone to hold them to him/herself is in some ways wrong. As I said, with the therapy aspect of things I can see an exception (there always are), but art is an important aspect of our interrelatedness.

I'm descending into gibberish again...

[Buckyrig]

The point is not to make people feel what you want them to feel, it's just to prod them into responding. You, as a creator, are giving the audience a device; it's up to them to decide what to do with it.

You're killing me, dude.

:laugh:

[FA]

If the creator is the only audience you care about, then that's fine. But don't bother trying to interest others in the work, as it will be intrinsically uninteresting to them.

That's a nonsensical assertion and I have many things to say about it. On my way out the door though, more later.

[Buckyrig]

Well, that's kinda fucked up. :blink:

[MattWaterman]

You don't think indulging in a cyclical behavior like that can affect your mind?


Heh. I was calling you Tipper Gore for your desire to censor anything that does not fit your strict definition of "happy" and "good"...

:laugh:

[Newt]

That's a nonsensical assertion and I have many things to say about it. On my way out the door though, more later.

I think I know what tack you're going to take, so let me say this: work created primarily for oneself may be quite interesting to others; however, you will have to provide them with the requisite internal information that you didn't need to include when you were creating only for yourself, as you already knew it. Otherwise the work would be no more interesting to others than an inside joke or someone's personal notes, simply because vital information is missing.

[Newt]

You're killing me, dude.

:laugh:

Softly?

[Buckyrig]

Heh. I was calling you Tipper Gore for your desire to censor anything that does not fit your strict definition of "happy" and "good"...

:laugh:

Yeah...I got the Tipper reference.

I'm not trying to censor anything...just ridicule it into irrelevance. :nyah:

But on a more serious note, Newt's earlier comment about 'dark' being a fashion I was thinking is probably the largest part of my problem here. It seems to me that maybe people are being told - whether implicitly or through a confluence of attitudes, opinions, and experiences...or even explicity - that 'dark' equals 'deep' or 'art'.

Which do you forgive more: bad comedy or bad tragic drama? And why?

[MattWaterman]

If the creator is the only audience you care about, then that's fine. But don't bother trying to interest others in the work, as it will be intrinsically uninteresting to them.


Again: balancing act. The counterpoint is that if one is passionate about a project then the audience will pick that up naturally. If one actively tries to hit a specific audience, however, that person runs the risk, at best, of trying to hit a moving target and, at worse, creating a game show out of what was ostensibley something they cared very deeply about...

[Buckyrig]

Again: balancing act. The counterpoint is that if one is passionate about a project then the audience will pick that up naturally.

But if the author/artist is passionate about hating their parents and their boss, etc, there is most assuredly something there to explore and people will relate, but if it's nothing more than a breakdown of those very simple things...well, I can jerk myself off.

[Newt]

Again: balancing act. The counterpoint is that if one is passionate about a project then the audience will pick that up naturally. If one actively tries to hit a specific audience, however, that person runs the risk, at best, of trying to hit a moving target and, at worse, creating a game show out of what was ostensibley something they cared very deeply about...

That depends on how you define your target audience; if it's 'affluent suburban teen girls' or similar, yeah, you're likely to end up aiming where they were yesterday; however, if your target audience is 'people who've had their hearts broken by a deceitful scoundrel', well, that's an audience that never goes away.

[Newt]

But if the author/artist is passionate about hating their parents and their boss, etc, there is most assuredly something there to explore and people will relate, but if it's nothing more than a breakdown of those very simple things...well, I can jerk myself off.

Thanks for that lovely mental image.

[Buckyrig]

I speak metaphorically, you cosmic peeping Tom!

[Newt]

Peeping Tom? You flashed me, you filthy bugger!

[Buckyrig]

"bugger"? :blink:

[Newt]

In the Aussie sense, not the British sense.

[Calloway]

Dunno if this was mentioned but to see how truly blessed we are in the USA and how inspiring someone can be check out the documentary "God grew tired of Us" about some of the Lost boys of the Sudan. It's funny, sad, and awe inspiring, the main guy Jon is a new hero of mine.

[Mike225]

Quiet, you gits!

[MattWaterman]

But if the author/artist is passionate about hating their parents and their boss, etc, there is most assuredly something there to explore and people will relate, but if it's nothing more than a breakdown of those very simple things...well, I can jerk myself off.

Ah, cannot one find new ways of jerking off...?

Ok seriously: I think it's a fool's mission to try to figure out the worthiness/unworthiness of an artist's mission while talking in such broad swaths. It becomes all conjecture on what said artist is making and whether it will hit or not. Say what you want about Stephan King but, in terms of knowing and writing for his audience, he has made some decent reads in his day. On the other hand, Nietzche is damn-near impenatrable and almost purposefully obtuse yet it has inspired such divergent entities as the Nazis and Jim Morrison.

And one second point: Are speaking in terms of artistic success or artistic fulfillment? Because those are two different things that overlap only part of the time. Jackie Collins has made a mint off her stuff while that monk I mentioned never published a thing. How is one supposed to define each's success as an artist...?

[Buckyrig]

I'm the customer! I will judge whatever I want.

You spent too much time in church.

All my marbles are gold!

[Buckyrig]

And one second point: Are speaking in terms of artistic success or artistic fulfillment? Because those are two different things that overlap only part of the time. Jackie Collins has made a mint off her stuff while that monk I mentioned never published a thing. How is one supposed to define each's success as an artist...?

You seem to be defining 'artistic success' as the size of the audience here rather than the size of the impact on the audience your work finds.

Under that criterion, I would say that there is quite a sizable overlap between artistic success and artistic fulfillment.

[MattWaterman]

I knew it. These conversations always come down to those stupid Venn Diagrams...

:laugh: ;)

[Buckyrig]

Hey!

You brought this "overlap" shit into the conversation.


I just wanted to let everyone know about this amazing person who will be drawing some upcoming issues of one of the X-Men titles. *












* It could happen if he know or learns how to draw and likes the X-Men and decides to submit and get through the submissions process.

[MattWaterman]

This thread has put that song by the Crash Test Dummies in my head. "When I Go Out With Artists"...

When I go out with artists
They talk about language and the cubists and the dadaists
And I try to catch their meanings
And I try to keep up with all of the martinis
I dont know which should be my favorite painitings

If I could see, if I could see, if I could
See all the symbols, unlock what they mean
Maybe I could, maybe I could, maybe i
Could meet the artists, and get to know them personally

[Buckyrig]

Uh...I'm the feller what's without the education here.

You isn't aiming that at me, is you?

[MattWaterman]

Uh...I'm the feller what's without the education here.

You isn't aiming that at me, is you?

:eek:

Ha! No! Really...face value. We were talking about art so I got an art song in my head.

I'm a simple man.

[Buckyrig]

Funny, I keep thinking about Surrender by Cheap Trick. :confused:

[Mike225]

:eek:

Ha! No! Really...face value. We were talking about art so I got an art song in my head.

I'm a simple man.Follow your heart...and nothing else.

[Newt]

*Bussscccchhhhh*

[MattWaterman]

:confused:


Did a plane just fly over...?

[Newt]

Busch Beer has been running radio ads in which a man whispers 'Bussscccchhhhh' while the above-quoted 'Simple Man' is playing. Perhaps this is a regional campaign, I don't know.

[FA]

I think I know what tack you're going to take, so let me say this: work created primarily for oneself may be quite interesting to others; however, you will have to provide them with the requisite internal information that you didn't need to include when you were creating only for yourself, as you already knew it. Otherwise the work would be no more interesting to others than an inside joke or someone's personal notes, simply because vital information is missing.

I just tried to explain exactly why you're missing it (whilst eating a caramel apple, no less) but I can't do it without making mushroom anecdotes and sounding like some shoeless hippy.

I'll draw up a venn diagram later :rolleyes:

[Newt]

I'm up for mushroom anecdotes, and I won't mock your shoeless hippiness nearly as much as Buckyrig will. Please go on.

[Buckyrig]

Oh that ship sailed long ago, lady. :D

[MattWaterman]

Oo!!! I think she's referencing Kiekegard's analogy of a tree and the roots of metaphysics!!!! :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: It's that idea that the physical sciences like chemistry are the branches coming off the trunk of physics!! BUT....below it all, unseen, are the roots---the metaphysics of language and knowledge itself!!! :carrot:

I love that analogy!!!

[FA]

:huh: How did he know....?

[Nick Kerklaan]

Uh... I never went to college, so some of this is going a little over my head. Not by much though, because I'm a genius.

Discussions like this are interesting, but really it comes down to everything being subjective anyway. You can't make any sort of objective statement about anything like this, just argue things from your own viewpoint, which is, by definition, limited. I don't really like the Eagles all that much. Does that mean the Eagles are shit, and that their legions of fans are wrong? No, because my opinions are not objective reality. Bucky, I understand where you're coming from, I really do, but to someone (probably a lot of people), dark is deep, and to them, that's all that matters.

As for the "nature of art", well, this is just me, but creating something is in itself a great joy and to have a finished product you are proud of and can personally appreciate is a great feeling. Then if you decide to show people, people take what they will from it, and it mutates. It takes on a life of its own. A feeling of accomplishment and a feeling of having touched and affected other people are two different things. Personally, I'd rather have both. I mean, what's the point of throwing a work of art you're really proud of into a drawer and never showing it to anyone? I don't create for an audience so much as I create for a hypothetical audience of myself. I make something I would want in a work of art. Assuming I am not completely out of step with the human race, someone else out there is bound to vibe with it. I mean, in theory anyway.

I'm really tired so if no one understands any of that, that's why. Or it's that whole "never went to college" thing.

[FA]

I don't create for an audience so much as I create for a hypothetical audience of myself.

:thumbs:

[Buckyrig]

Devil's Advocate...don't take it personally...;)

Uh... I never went to college, so some of this is going a little over my head. Not by much though, because I'm a genius.

Discussions like this are interesting, but really it comes down to everything being subjective anyway. You can't make any sort of objective statement about anything like this, just argue things from your own viewpoint, which is, by definition, limited. I don't really like the Eagles all that much. Does that mean the Eagles are shit, and that their legions of fans are wrong? No, because my opinions are not objective reality. Bucky, I understand where you're coming from, I really do, but to someone (probably a lot of people), dark is deep, and to them, that's all that matters.

You're wrong. And by extension of your own logic I am right...which makes you wrong...which may or may not cancel out my being right...and here comes the reality implosion.

Profundity is not subjective. Something is deep or it is not. The problem is we are retarded monkeys and are sometimes not equal to the task of identification. But anything that anyone can come up with, without any real reflection is not deep.

As for the "nature of art", well, this is just me, but creating something is in itself a great joy and to have a finished product you are proud of and can personally appreciate is a great feeling.

You're doing it wrong. There should be a sense of accomplishment and a need to share it if you truly believe it is worthwhile. But it should not be fun in my opinion. It should be an unquenchable obsession that must be indulged. Speaking specifically to writing: "Writers don't like writing...they like having written."

Then if you decide to show people, people take what they will from it, and it mutates. It takes on a life of its own.

Yes and no. Take Matt's Nietzsche example of the absurdly disparate inferences. Or (for our friend K-Panz) take the Dead Kennedys problem with drawing Nazi fans because some people don't understand irony. :laugh:

A feeling of accomplishment and a feeling of having touched and affected other people are two different things. Personally, I'd rather have both. I mean, what's the point of throwing a work of art you're really proud of into a drawer and never showing it to anyone?

Oh...I've "burned" some stuff in my time. But because it was utter garbage. I do believe you need to work that out of your system so you can create something good. :)

I don't create for an audience so much as I create for a hypothetical audience of myself. I make something I would want in a work of art. Assuming I am not completely out of step with the human race, someone else out there is bound to vibe with it. I mean, in theory anyway.

Yes...that's fine. I've thrown this one around myself. But it's only step one in my opinion. One may decide upon completion not to show something...but it seems nearly absurd to enter a project with that plan.

I'm really tired so if no one understands any of that, that's why. Or it's that whole "never went to college" thing.

College clutters your mind. :laugh:

Went, dropped out...of course I didn't take any art or lit classes.

:har:

[Buckyrig]

I don't create for an audience so much as I create for a hypothetical audience of myself. I make nonsensical assertions and I have many things to say about it. On my way out the door though, out of rum. :thumbs:

I'm not sure what you're point is here. :huh:

[FA]

Nick is the only person I didn't have to actually beg to participate in this debate

Have some dignity, man. :w00t:

[Nick Kerklaan]

Profundity is not subjective. Something is deep or it is not. The problem is we are retarded monkeys and are sometimes not equal to the task of identification. But anything that anyone can come up with, without any real reflection is not deep.

Well, I know this is just your subjective opinion, but I disagree. Profundity is subjective. I found the recent Transformers movie profound. If you didn't, neither of us is wrong, it vibed for me, it didn't for you. It's that simple. It's assuming a lot about the universe and how it works to suggest that there is any sort of cosmic, objective standard of meaningfulness in art.


You're doing it wrong. There should be a sense of accomplishment and a need to share it if you truly believe it is worthwhile. But it should not be fun in my opinion. It should be an unquenchable obsession that must be indulged. Speaking specifically to writing: "Writers don't like writing...they like having written."

That's one of those maxims that I just don't get. I like writing, not just having written. If it wasn't fun, on some level, why the fuck would I bother doing it? I might as well just go work extra hours and have more money to buy pornography. That burning desire to communicate something is just one aspect of the creative process. If that's all you're paying attention to, well... I think you're kind of missing the point. It's worth it to take some joy in just the simple act of creating sometimes.

Oh...I've "burned" some stuff in my time. But because it was utter garbage. I do believe you need to work that out of your system so you can create something good.

Another writer's maxim I don't really agree with. There isn't some set number of "garbage pages" you have to get through before you start writing things that are good. Sometimes you make good art, sometimes you make garbage. And because this is all subjective anyway, the only thing that determines what makes it into what pile is your own standards.

Yes...that's fine. I've thrown this one around myself. But it's only step one in my opinion. One may decide upon completion not to show something...but it seems nearly absurd to enter a project with that plan.

Maybe you midunderstand... when I say "I write for a hypothetical audience of myself", I mean I write fully intending to be read. But I write to please a theoretical "me", not "me, the writer", but "me, if I were a person completely seperate person from the person who wrote this and picked it off the shelf". After that everyone else can take what they want from it. But I'd never seriously embark on a project intending to just lock it away after.

[Buckyrig]

Have some dignity, man. :w00t:

I will fight you in the streets of Detroit!

[Buckyrig]

Still...Devil's Advocate. :)

Well, I know this is just your subjective opinion, but I disagree. Profundity is subjective. I found the recent Transformers movie profound. If you didn't, neither of us is wrong, it vibed for me, it didn't for you. It's that simple. It's assuming a lot about the universe and how it works to suggest that there is any sort of cosmic, objective standard of meaningfulness in art.

Bah...relativistic nonsense.

Bear in mind, this also allows the flip side to be valid. That, subjectively,
a person who misses all the reasons a piece or art, music, or literature is considered a masterwork, is in fact correct that the piece is garbage.

That's one of those maxims that I just don't get. I like writing, not just having written. If it wasn't fun, on some level, why the fuck would I bother doing it? I might as well just go work extra hours and have more money to buy pornography. That burning desire to communicate something is just one aspect of the creative process. If that's all you're paying attention to, well... I think you're kind of missing the point. It's worth it to take some joy in just the simple act of creating sometimes.

Obsession.

Another writer's maxim I don't really agree with. There isn't some set number of "garbage pages" you have to get through before you start writing things that are good. Sometimes you make good art, sometimes you make garbage. And because this is all subjective anyway, the only thing that determines what makes it into what pile is your own standards.

So, writing is an activity unlike any other that a human being undertakes? No one is good at much of anything without practice. To think that one can start a new activity and be proficient immediately is wishful thinking.

Maybe you midunderstand... when I say "I write for a hypothetical audience of myself", I mean I write fully intending to be read. But I write to please a theoretical "me", not "me, the writer", but "me, if I were a person completely seperate person from the person who wrote this and picked it off the shelf". After that everyone else can take what they want from it. But I'd never seriously embark on a project intending to just lock it away after.

Keen.

I already addressed that unqualified take what they want statement.

[Nick Kerklaan]

Okay, I really need to go to bed now, but...

Bear in mind, this also allows the flip side to be valid. That, subjectively,
a person who misses all the reasons a piece or art, music, or literature is considered a masterwork, is in fact correct that the piece is garbage.

I never said this wasn't the case.

So, writing is an activity unlike any other that a human being undertakes? No one is good at much of anything without practice. To think that one can start a new activity and be proficient immediately is wishful thinking.

Yeah... you're right, actually. I take back what I said.

Obsession.

Yeah, but can't I be obsessed in a fun way? To put it another way, what's the point of getting worked into an obsession in the first place over something you don't enjoy, not just the result of, but the process? I have a hard time believing that any writer actually hates writing. Whoever said "Writers don't like writing, they like having written" was speaking some ol' bullshit, I think, and people that buy into it need to pay more attention to the good feelings and yes, maybe even fun that they have while writing, not just the "Phew, that was tough" afterwards. No offense.

I already addressed that unqualified take what they want statement.

Yeah, and I think it's really just a given that sometimes people will take something other than what you intended. And yet I really don't give a fuck if people think I'm a Nazi because they don't understand irony. Once it's out of my brain, on the page, and in the hands of the public, it's not mine anymore. I mean, it is, to the extent that I wrote it, but, like, I really don't care what Frank Miller was thinking or feeling when he wrote Dark Knight, I only care what I felt and thought when I read it. I guess maybe I'm just a whore that way.

And I know you're playing Devil's Advocate, and I don't take it personally but at the same time I kind of hope you do believe what you're saying because otherwise I might as well be debating with a computer program that analyzes what I'm saying, says the opposite, and presents that as its counter-argument.

Actually, that'd be pretty sweet.

[Buckyrig]

And I know you're playing Devil's Advocate, and I don't take it personally but at the same time I kind of hope you do believe what you're saying because otherwise I might as well be debating with a computer program that analyzes what I'm saying, says the opposite, and presents that as its counter-argument.

Actually, I believe most things fall somewhere in the middle. But that's not conducive to a conversation like this...I believe the things I post...sometimes there is just some emphasis and deemphasis based on the conversation.

Of course, here with the purpose of my posting the original article and pointing to something unusually positive in the arts...and the general sense that 'out there' constructive impulses seem to be considered less valid (even if only by being largely ignored)...we can touch back on your statements about validity. Some ethereal confluence has decided that dark is better than optimistic or positive or hopeful...which, applying your earlier posit, is bullshit.

;)

I do believe the 'having written' thing because I already felt that way before I had ever heard it from someone else.



Of course, if he was drawing X-Men, the thread would have been 7 pages long within an hour of the first post. :whistlin:

[Newt]

X-Men sucks!

[Nick Kerklaan]

Of course, here with the purpose of my posting the original article and pointing to something unusually positive in the arts...and the general sense that 'out there' constructive impulses seem to be considered less valid (even if only by being largely ignored)...we can touch back on your statements about validity. Some ethereal confluence has decided that dark is better than optimistic or positive or hopeful...which, applying your earlier posit, is bullshit.

I don't even know how much this is true, really. I think sometimes it just seems that way... but that there's a lot of highly regarded positive art. Damned if I can think of any right now so maybe there actually isn't, but, uh.... well you gotta take the good with the bad. Or something.

[Nick Kerklaan]

This just in: Nietzsche is drawing X-Men.

[Mike225]

I heard Descartes was approached to write X-Men. He said, "I think not," then disappeared.





:yuk:

[Nick Kerklaan]

:eek:


EDIT: In place of Descartes, Marvel has enlisted Karl Marx. Look for "X-Men: Eternal Struggle Of The Working Class" later this fall.

[FA]

Of course, if he was drawing X-Men, the thread would have been 7 pages long within an hour of the first post. :whistlin:

I can understand you being disappointed with the response but on the other hand, how many people actually want to get into a discussion on the nature of art or anything similarly airy that requires long sentences and tediously involved counterpoints with a bunch of ill-qualified internet goons? Seems to me the ones who just read it and considered it privately are the smart ones.

[MattWaterman]

Yeah, but how do you know they read it and pondered it?!?!


Cartesianism SUCKS!!!

[Newt]

I can understand you being disappointed with the response but on the other hand, how many people actually want to get into a discussion on the nature of art or anything similarly airy that requires long sentences and tediously involved counterpoints with a bunch of ill-qualified internet goons? Seems to me the ones who just read it and considered it privately are the smart ones.

Did you just call me an ill-qualified goon? :cry:

[FA]

Did you just call me an ill-qualified goon? :cry:

No, no, not you, newt. You're eminently qualified to be a goon.

[Newt]

Thank you, FA.

[FA]

My pleasure.

[Nick Kerklaan]

Guess I've gotta work extra hard so I can get those goon qualifications. It's a fast-moving market and before I know it all the good jobs will be gone.

[Buckyrig]

I can understand you being disappointed with the response but on the other hand, how many people actually want to get into a discussion on the nature of art or anything similarly airy that requires long sentences and tediously involved counterpoints with a bunch of ill-qualified internet goons? Seems to me the ones who just read it and considered it privately are the smart ones.

What's 'ill-qualified'?

Seems snobbish.

Bland bland bland...should no one bother then? Isn't an artistic expression this type of activity inside oneself? If we're looking for qualifications...well we're getting into those very arbitrary parameters I've been chastised for here.

Excuse me...need to post my top ten (something) list.

YEEEEEEHAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!

[FA]

What's 'ill-qualified'?

Seems snobbish.

Like suggesting that a Harry Potter book isn't literature?

[Nick Kerklaan]

Okay guys, settle down. We don't want to cross-contaminate any of our threads here.

[Buckyrig]

Like suggesting that a Harry Potter book isn't literature?

:laugh:

Yeah...but I'm just poking the bear.

[FA]

What do you think I'm doing?

[Nick Kerklaan]

Come to think of it, Harry Potter is a good example of a popular, largely positive, work of art.

So, uh, I guess cross-contamination is unavoidable.

[Buckyrig]

What do you think I'm doing?

Subverting American ideals with your pinko European philosophies that are only charming when they're across an ocean?

[Buckyrig]

Come to think of it, Harry Potter is a good example of a popular, largely positive, work of art.

So, uh, I guess cross-contamination is unavoidable.

Can't comment. Haven't read any...and only seen snippets of the movies.

[FA]

Come to think of it, Harry Potter is a good example of a popular, largely positive, work of art.

So, uh, I guess cross-contamination is unavoidable.

I thought Harry Potter was popular because it wasn't largely positive. It was largely negative with a sliver of hope.

I'd expand on that but unless millions of people agree with me I'm clearly wrong.

[FA]

Subverting American ideals with your pinko European philosophies that are only charming when they're across an ocean?

:thumbs:

[Buckyrig]

I thought it was popular because it was shoved down the Public's throat by a marketing juggernaut.



You like this! Buy!

[FA]

I thought it was popular because it was shoved down the Public's throat by a marketing juggernaut.



You like this! Buy!

No, the marketing juggernaut only cranked into action once the first book had already garnered a large audience. If you go back to when the first one was released, most people who read it (in england at least, I can't speak for anywhere else) did so because a friend recommended it to them.

[Buckyrig]

They've gotten to FA! :eek:

It's over! Engage self-destruct. See you fine folks on Mars.

[Nick Kerklaan]

I thought Harry Potter was popular because it wasn't largely positive. It was largely negative with a sliver of hope.

I always saw it as a largely positive story of good triumphing over evil. All the "darker" bits like character deaths that seemed, by the middle of the series, obligatory, seemed, to me, to just be things thrown in by Rowling to keep her growing adult audience's attention. But it's a positive story at its core - even when things look down for our heroes, they're never for long. Its message is "Hang in there."

[FA]

I always saw it as a largely positive story of good triumphing over evil. All the "darker" bits like character deaths that seemed, by the middle of the series, obligatory, seemed, to me, to just be things thrown in by Rowling to keep her growing adult audience's attention. But it's a positive story at its core - even when things look down for our heroes, they're never for long. Its message is "Hang in there."

Fair enough. But then if it was up to me harry would have died in the end, so I'm one of these terribly gauche glass half empty people that this whole thread is about.

Shit. :(

[Nick Kerklaan]

Fair enough. But then if it was up to me harry would have died in the end, so I'm one of these terribly gauche glass half empty people that this whole thread is about.

Shit.

Well, if it makes you feel any better, so am I. I feel the exact same way about the ending. That doesn't change that it's not the way story ended up going, so it stays largely "feel-good" at its core.

[Buckyrig]

Fair enough. But then if it was up to me harry would have died in the end, so I'm one of these terribly gauche glass half empty people that this whole thread is about.

Shit. :(

Not necessarily...since that would be a bookend almost. Telling the entire story of this person.

When I speak of an overemphasis on 'dark', I speak of the fetish of all this flagellation nonsense without purpose...but I'm repeating at this point.




Of course, positive stories are popular with the public...they're not so popular among the 'important folk' of creativity. Artists, critics, and the like.

[Nick Kerklaan]

Of course, positive stories are popular with the public...they're not so popular among the 'important folk' of creativity. Artists, critics, and the like.

Yeah, that's true. I realized after I suggested Potter as an example that you weren't considering commercial popularity, but a collective assesment of "artistic integrity" among the "important folK". I think maybe you might be right here, but I guess I'm just not learned enough to have a firm grasp of the Whole Picture either way.

[Scott James]

No, the marketing juggernaut only cranked into action once the first book had already garnered a large audience. If you go back to when the first one was released, most people who read it (in england at least, I can't speak for anywhere else) did so because a friend recommended it to them.Or had the first four novels force-fed to them before they were allowed to see the first movie...

...not that I'm bitter. :whistlin:

But what exactly is being debated here?

That something can only be art if it is communicable to people other than the creator?

That's a crock because I have painted many a picture and written lots of stories that I have saved only for my own eyes. But then again I am very secretive and highly-paranoid.

It's a cliche to regard all artists as tortured, isn't it?

Aren't all humans tortured to some degree?

In my experience, those people who don't exhibit any overt signs of stress or mental duress and think that they are sane are normally the ones who snap after having eaten one shit sandwich too many and then gun down their co-workers in psychotic rage (with a staple gun, as the case maybe in the UK).

Madness is not a prerequsite of great art. Nor is pain a fine indicator of somebody's talent (e.g. witness the work of Tracey Emin).

Art is about discussion and debate. Not whether or not something is 'great' or 'beautiful' (two rather superfluous terms when engaging in an exchange of ideas) but the affect it has on the artist and how it affects those who view it.

But here's a few questions for you:

Would the Mona Lisa still be a work of art if no one had ever saw it?

Would the Sistine Chapel be remembered if everybody in the world was blind?

[Buckyrig]

But what exactly is being debated here?

I'm bitching about the glee with which cynical, nihilistic, and depressing topics are devoured while the mention of something positive - and relevant to a board of creative types - get crickets.

Basically, the tacitness to me implies that working through art is apparently to determine that the world is shit.

Ditch diggers know this...way to waste your life. :thumbs:








Too bitter?

[Scott James]

I'm bitching about the glee with which cynical, nihilistic, and depressing topics are devoured while the mention of something positive - and relevant to a board of creative types - get crickets.

Basically, the tacitness to me implies that working through art is apparently to determine that the world is shit.

Ditch diggers know this...way to waste your life. :thumbs:








Too bitter?Would it help if I gave you a hug?

[Buckyrig]

Would it help if I gave you a hug?

You want the Dumbledore thread.

[Scott James]

You want the Dumbledore thread.You look like you need the cuddle more

[Buckyrig]

I'm gonna go all posicore on this joint!

[Scott James]

I'm gonna go all posicore on this joint!Just learn to exhale - let out the pain. Then breath - bring in the love.

Come on, I promise to keep my hands above your waist.

[Buckyrig]

99 Red Balloons!!!!

[MattWaterman]

I always saw it as a largely positive story of good triumphing over evil. All the "darker" bits like character deaths that seemed, by the middle of the series, obligatory, seemed, to me, to just be things thrown in by Rowling to keep her growing adult audience's attention. But it's a positive story at its core - even when things look down for our heroes, they're never for long. Its message is "Hang in there."


HA! And now we're back to the nature of story-telling again!!! (you're not the only one here with an agenda, Bucky...) Is a story still considered negative if the protagagonist wins in the end? After all, the greatest hero is only as good as his greatest villain. Empire Strikes Back was really kind of a downer yet is widely considered the best of the Star Wars movies. And further, if one has a happy-go-lucky work that ends on a bad note in the final 10 minutes/20 pages is that still considered a "negative" work...?

Definitionally, we're going to have a very hard time nailing down what is and isn't a 'negative' work...

[dano]

I'm bitching about the glee with which cynical, nihilistic, and depressing topics are devoured while the mention of something positive - and relevant to a board of creative types - get crickets.

I shall quote myself:
You should know We define ourselves by the pain and suffering We encounter! What did you expect? GOOD news?

[Newt]

HA! And now we're back to the nature of story-telling again!!! (you're not the only one here with an agenda, Bucky...) Is a story still considered negative if the protagagonist wins in the end? After all, the greatest hero is only as good as his greatest villain. Empire Strikes Back was really kind of a downer yet is widely considered the best of the Star Wars movies. And further, if one has a happy-go-lucky work that ends on a bad note in the final 10 minutes/20 pages is that still considered a "negative" work...?

Definitionally, we're going to have a very hard time nailing down what is and isn't a 'negative' work...

I think what we were talking about was a little more focused than simply a story wherein the protagonist does not 'win'- works that are ABOUT negativity, where pain, misery, grief, cramps, etc. are the main theme of the work; more Strindberg than Lucas. Action stories like Star Wars are seldom so wallowing, 'cause you got to have some drive to kick ass.

[MattWaterman]

Fair enough. Though some may protest, the Star Wars trilogy isn't exactly 'art' in same way that, say, Apocalypse Now was... :eek:

But speaking of sticks and bears, does this mean that certain whole genres are precluded from being 'art' simply because they have a certain formula? I mean, almost literally every action story has its origins in The Odyssey and The Iliad. If we exclude the modern examples we have to exclude Homer's stuff and probably at least a couple Shakesperian plays...

[Buckyrig]

HA! And now we're back to the nature of story-telling again!!! (you're not the only one here with an agenda, Bucky...) Is a story still considered negative if the protagagonist wins in the end? After all, the greatest hero is only as good as his greatest villain. Empire Strikes Back was really kind of a downer yet is widely considered the best of the Star Wars movies. And further, if one has a happy-go-lucky work that ends on a bad note in the final 10 minutes/20 pages is that still considered a "negative" work...?

Definitionally, we're going to have a very hard time nailing down what is and isn't a 'negative' work...

But this only works when you start by narrowly defining my initial intent. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:







BOOYA! :bounce:

[MattWaterman]

But this only works when you start by narrowly defining my initial intent. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


BOOYA! :bounce:


Hey, you were the one that wanted life to be all sausages and flowers.... (http://poetv.com/video.php?vid=8057)


This is the comment that just makes it for me:

I wish life was all flowers and sausages...and less fat kids running down the street in their boxers

[Buckyrig]

No, I want people to stop bitching about life, without purpose.

[MattWaterman]

You mean their life has no purpose or their bitching has no purpose or their purposeful bitching because they have no purpose in life....? :blink:

Cause I can't imagine too much bitching that solves a real, concrete purpose. Though I am open to debate on that...

:cool:

[Buckyrig]

The bitching has no purpose.

It's not special. Fucking say something if you're going to use up my time...that is special.

[dano]

Maybe there IS a purpose but it's secret to only the bitcher

[Buckyrig]

Don't...waste...my...time...

It's the only thing of real value in this world.

[dano]

^ that presumes people outside of you care about the relative value of your time.
Perhaps the proper statement would be "don't present me with time red-herrings which i may fall prey to!"

[FA]

The bitching has no purpose.

It's not special. Fucking say something if you're going to use up my time...that is special.


Nobody uses up your time without your permission - if there's something you don't want to bother with, don't, but this "don't waste my time" stuff is the height of narcissism.

[Buckyrig]

HORSESHIT!!!!!!!!!!



"Give it a chance"

"How are you going to judge something without reading it?"

"You're going to let someone else's opinion of it keep you from checking it out?"

Etc Etc Etc...

I know this game... :)

[FA]

************************************************** ******
*******************PLEASE NOTE***************************
************************************************** ******

Posts after this line must meet approval and enhance life of thread starter.
Strict moderation of comments will continue until conformity of opinion is achieved.

************************************************** ******
************************************************** ******
************************************************** ******

[dano]

The artistic irony of this thread is awesome. :D

[Buckyrig]

I still haven't heard convincing argument why masturbatory art should be admired.

Don't get on me when you're fueled by your own presuppositions. :nyah:

[FA]

I still haven't heard convincing argument why masturbatory art should be admired.

Don't get on me when you're fueled by your own presuppositions. :nyah:

Nobody is saying it should be admired. At least I'm not saying that, I was too busy masturbating to read everyone else's posts.

But there is a difference between not falling over yourself to applaud something and saying that because you see no worth in it, obviously nobody else can and it should not exist.

Nobody saw the intrinsic value of my MSPaint crocodile diving into a bird and richocheting off a buffalo picture, but I poured heart and soul into that fucker.

Don't you oppress me!

[Buckyrig]

Why not?

That's perfect. I'm going to start a movement towards "Artistic Darwinism". :laugh:



Also: Defense of = implied worth...no?

[Buckyrig]

Truly though...you don't think there should be a fire lit under people's asses to evolve?

[dano]

Nope. It's not something you can force on someone. I think people have to get there themselves.

Even though I'm fond of wishing People would stop being stupid morons it's never going to happen and you can't force someone to wise up. They have to come to that realization themselves.

[FA]

Truly though...you don't think there should be a fire lit under people's asses to evolve?

I was kinda hoping everyone else would die off so I wouldn't have to compete. :w00t:

Maybe it's just in the phrasing. If you pointed to a specific example and wrote a lengthy profanity-laced diatribe about how it was an abomination, I would be all grins and gang signs. But this 'dance monkey dance' shit rubs me the wrong way.

[Buckyrig]

Nope. It's not something you can force on someone. I think people have to get there themselves.

Even though I'm fond of wishing People would stop being stupid morons it's never going to happen and you can't force someone to wise up. They have to come to that realization themselves.

Praising mediocre work will hamper though.

And I do actually think that, of all people, artists are most likely to absorb thoughtful criticism.

[Buckyrig]

But this 'dance monkey dance' shit rubs me the wrong way.

Then it's working. :laugh:

[FA]

Then it's working. :laugh:

You're prompting people to engage in unproductive bitching by....complaining about unproductive bitching.

:confused: Stop it! You're making my vision go all weird.

[dano]

Praising mediocre work will hamper though.

And I do actually think that, of all people, artists are most likely to absorb thoughtful criticism.

mediocre work is relative to the viewer. An ignorant simpleton may honestly like X3, while an informed sophist would call it rubbish.

in the same way a movie the informed sophist thinks is genuis would fly over the head of the ignorant simpleton.

[Mike225]

mediocre work is relative to the viewer. An ignorant simpleton may honestly like X3, while an informed sophist would call it rubbish.

in the same way a movie the informed sophist thinks is genuis would fly over the head of the ignorant simpleton.That's cool, that makes me refined.

[Buckyrig]

You're prompting people to engage in unproductive bitching by....complaining about unproductive bitching.

:confused: Stop it! You're making my vision go all weird.

Well that's just like, your opinion, man.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/14/The.Big.Lebowski.1998.Screenshot.1.jpg/350px-The.Big.Lebowski.1998.Screenshot.1.jpg

[Buckyrig]

mediocre work is relative to the viewer. An ignorant simpleton may honestly like X3, while an informed sophist would call it rubbish.

in the same way a movie the informed sophist thinks is genuis would fly over the head of the ignorant simpleton.

I liked X3. It entertained me. That was its purpose.

[Mike225]

I liked X3. It entertained me. That was its purpose.And you bitch about Robocop 2?! :confused:

[Buckyrig]

It didn't have junkie robots in it.

[Mike225]

It didn't have junkie robots in it.Oddly enough, that's why I didn't like X3. Not enough tweaking AI!

[MattWaterman]

Maybe it's just in the phrasing. If you pointed to a specific example and wrote a lengthy profanity-laced diatribe about how it was an abomination, I would be all grins and gang signs. But this 'dance monkey dance' shit rubs me the wrong way.

Agree. Your net seems to be huge, Bucky, and I'm afraid you might grab some Vonnegudolphins or Nietsch-whales in it...

:(

[Buckyrig]

Actually...you keep trying to take my 'macro' argument and apply it to 'micro' examples...which of course assumes that I am targeting those works.

Mr. Vonnegut there even decribes artists as the 'canary in the cave' of society...having a purpose of being at the vanguard...noticing, exploring, reporting back...speaking of mankinds crises in this case. But the thinking can be more broadly employed.

"I'm miserable, how 'bout you?" doesn't really do this. ;)




Please don't make me quote Rush. :cry:

[Buckyrig]

Actually...you keep trying to take my 'macro' argument and apply it to 'micro' examples...which of course assumes that I am targeting those works.

Or rather...you're looking for completed works. Final, existing, products. I'm looking at the impulse.

Like I said quite a ways back...maybe those who never develop a purpose...a need for the search, to communicate that journey...maybe they fall away and get jobs with the city.

Or maybe my point is so valid that such works never garner much attention. :whistlin:

Hey...that could be true. :har:

[Newt]

Go write a story, Bucky.

[Buckyrig]

No, I give up.

[MattWaterman]

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[Newt]

Why? Are you wallowing in despair and self-pity? Why don't you write a story about that; it might be good. :thumbs:

[MattWaterman]

It could be therapuetic...

[Newt]

It could be profound.

[Buckyrig]

I'm going to write a story about how murder is bad.

[Buckyrig]

OH! And it's going to have a gay wizard in it.

[MattWaterman]

I'm going to write a story about how murder is bad.


Isn't that like a morality play? I believe those have been "done" already...

:whistlin:

[Newt]

Will it change forever the way I look at homicide?

[MattWaterman]

OH! And it's going to have a gay wizard in it.


Ponchious Pilot was not gay!

:laugh: :eek: :p

[Buckyrig]

Will it change forever the way I look at homicide?

Yes. I will show unequivocally that it is not ok to murder people.

[Newt]

But...what if I really want to do it, and the victim is somewhat rude or annoying?

[Buckyrig]

But...what if I really want to do it, and the victim is somewhat rude or annoying?

See? This is exactly why the world needs this book.

It's going to be part of my Hey! Don't Do That Trilogy. The other two books will be about rape and slavery.

[Mike225]

Yes. I will show unequivocally that it is not ok to murder people.You sure you got the stones to stand by that?

[Buckyrig]

I'm all edgy and shit.

[Newt]

But how am I supposed to build my ziggurat without slave labor? Do you know how much contractors charge these days? Geez, Bucky, you and your stinking holier-than-thou moralism.

[Buckyrig]

The squares can't handle my shit. Take your Madison Avenue, Establishment BS and fade into the Dark Ages.

You don't understand pain!

[Newt]

Establishmen? That would be a great name for a superhero team. Write a story about the Establishmen, Bucky.

[Buckyrig]

Quiet!

I'm trying to channel the pain of the murdered.

[Mike225]

Establishmen? That would be a great name for a superhero team. Write a story about the Establishmen, Bucky.Stolen! :thumbs:

[Newt]

Quiet!

I'm trying to channel the pain of the murdered.

The murdered don't feel pain, dumbass. Those who are currently in the process of being murdered might be rather uncomfortable, however.

[Newt]

Stolen! :thumbs:

I want to see an outline and a profit-sharing plan by Monday or I'm calling the idea police.

[Mike225]

I want to see an outline and a profit-sharing plan by Monday or I'm calling the idea police.Dude, ixnay on the deaiay olicepay!

[Buckyrig]

The murdered don't feel pain, dumbass. Those who are currently in the process of being murdered might be rather uncomfortable, however.

It feels like pasty skin and black nail polish.

[Newt]

Isn't funny how people still say 'ixnay' but no one ever says 'nix' anymore? Oh, and Mike, I've got IPD on speed dial.

[Newt]

It feels like pasty skin and black nail polish.

No, that's what it feels like when you stick your hand into Berlin.

[Buckyrig]

I'm buying a sensory deprivation tank.

[Newt]

You'll turn into an ape-man and run amok!

[Buckyrig]

Altered States? :confused:

[FA]

I will take reams of masturbatory angst over just one more page of this masturbatory pun...iness.

YOU PEOPLE MAKE ME SICK! :yuk:

:w00t:

[MattWaterman]

Hehe.

You guys got in trooou-blllle!!!!!

:nyah:

[Buckyrig]

I will take reams of masturbatory angst over just one more page of this masturbatory pun...iness.

YOU PEOPLE MAKE ME SICK! :yuk:

:w00t:

Where the Hell are you seeing puns!? :confused:

[FA]

Wanna start something? Yeah? Yeah? Well fuck you too, buddy. :mad:



I couldn't find the word I needed. Shut up. :(

[Newt]

You're awfully testy.

[FA]

Piquant, if you please.