Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Parisbre56]

So, this is the "Yell at each other in a semi-therapeutic manner" thread then?

@Radio Controlled: Yes, but isn't Dadaism a school of art made out of pushing the boundaries of what can be called art, essentialy making everything created by man a form of art? I distinctly remember our 9th grade art teacher showing us a picture of a urinal that the book claimed to be dadaist art.

[Empiricist]

@Radio Controlled: Yes, but isn't Dadaism a school of art made out of pushing the boundaries of what can be called art, essentialy making everything created by man a form of art? I distinctly remember our 9th grade art teacher showing us a picture of a urinal that the book claimed to be dadaist art.

Ah, yes, Fountain. I do wonder about Dadaism, is it really a protest against the supposed established conventions of art? Or is it just an excuse to troll people and try displaying/selling random objects?

[Radio Controlled]

@Radio Controlled: Yes, but isn't Dadaism a school of art made out of pushing the boundaries of what can be called art, essentialy making everything created by man a form of art? I distinctly remember our 9th grade art teacher showing us a picture of a urinal that the book claimed to be dadaist art.

Ah, yes, Fountain. I do wonder about Dadaism, is it really a protest against the supposed established conventions of art? Or is it just an excuse to troll people and try displaying/selling random objects?

I love Dadaism, if only because of the sheer amount of confusion it can sow.

"It's a toilet."
"Nonono, it's a profound commentary on the futility of human endeavors in the light of infinity, captured by the out-of-place placement of such a mundane object outside of its normal context. It's really rather deep."
"I, uhh, I don't know if... I mean, still looks like a toilet."
"Pssh, peasant."

All the while our noble art connoisseur knows damn well it's just a toilet.

But yes, a decent definition of what is art is might be all but impossible, I was mostly referring to the obvious cases (e.g. me farting in a bottle and hanging it up in Tate Gallery).

[Harry Baldman]

After several hours spent listening to John Cage and pondering the questions raised in this thread, I can conclude that rap is most definitely music.

I'm also of the opinion that, as long as it's deliberately made or performed to provide you with an aesthetic or ethical experience, it's art. That's all you need for it to be art. As for whether you like it or not, or want to associate it with things you like, that's an entirely different question. For instance, RC farting in a bottle and hanging it up in the Tate Gallery (especially if he didn't tell anyone he would do it) would be art, and probably the kind of art you're not supposed to like, especially if he attached a five-hundred-page manifesto about farting in bottles to it.

[Radio Controlled]

After several hours spent listening to John Cage and pondering the questions raised in this thread, I can conclude that rap is most definitely music.

I'm also of the opinion that, as long as it's deliberately made or performed to provide you with an aesthetic or ethical experience, it's art. That's all you need for it to be art. As for whether you like it or not, or want to associate it with things you like, that's an entirely different question. For instance, RC farting in a bottle and hanging it up in the Tate Gallery (especially if he didn't tell anyone he would do it) would be art, and probably the kind of art you're not supposed to like, especially if he attached a five-hundred-page manifesto about farting in bottles to it.

Well, I was trying to provide an obvious but humorous example, but I can see why someone would still claim it's art. If only as a commentary on the ridiculousness of other art.
To make it even more clear what I originally meant: if I'm just walking down the street, with no other intentions, is that art? My grocery list, made purely for practical purposes, is that art in and of itself (never minding one could potentially turn it into art by putting it behind glass and hanging in Tate)?

[Harry Baldman]

Well, I was trying to provide an obvious but humorous example, but I can see why someone would still claim it's art. If only as a commentary on the ridiculousness of other art.
To make it even more clear what I originally meant: if I'm just walking down the street, with no other intentions, is that art? My grocery list, made purely for practical purposes, is that art in and of itself (never minding one could potentially turn it into art by putting it behind glass and hanging in Tate)?

I do believe both of your questions are answered by the definition I've given: as long as it's deliberately made or performed to provide you someone with an aesthetic or ethical experience, it's art. It's less about the content of the work and more about the intent of its display. If you embellish your grocery list with funny drawings so that the person you give it to has a laugh about it later (or perhaps even you yourself), you've deliberately created a work that creates an aesthetic or maybe ethical experience - art. If your handwriting's impeccable but that's simply the way you always write without specific intent, the list is simply beautiful. Sunsets are beautiful, but aren't art because they don't have artistic intent behind them. Toilets as a general rule aren't beautiful, but they're art when you display them with the appropriate intent and context. If you walk down the street in a very haunting manner simply because you're depressed, you simply look particular. If you walk down the street looking and acting like Dracula so that other people may point and laugh at you, you're creating art.

The problem's mostly that people conflate the idea of art itself with "art I enjoy" and/or "art I approve of". Otherwise, "is it art?" is a fairly simple question to answer.

[Radio Controlled]

I do believe both of your questions are answered by the definition I've given: as long as it's deliberately made or performed to provide you someone with an aesthetic or ethical experience, it's art. It's less about the content of the work and more about the intent of its display. If you embellish your grocery list with funny drawings so that the person you give it to has a laugh about it later (or perhaps even you yourself), you've deliberately created a work that creates an aesthetic or maybe ethical experience - art. If your handwriting's impeccable but that's simply the way you always write without specific intent, the list is simply beautiful. Sunsets are beautiful, but aren't art because they don't have artistic intent behind them. Toilets as a general rule aren't beautiful, but they're art when you display them with the appropriate intent and context. If you walk down the street in a very haunting manner simply because you're depressed, you simply look particular. If you walk down the street looking and acting like Dracula so that other people may point and laugh at you, you're creating art.

The problem's mostly that people conflate the idea of art itself with "art I enjoy" and/or "art I approve of".

I understand that, as I stated earlier:

It's like those people that see a work of art they don't understand/like, and immediately dismiss it as 'that's not art'. Not to say everything is art in and of itself (one should be careful not to get carried away with arty-farty bullshit) but to make such rash categorizations is often not leading to anything worthwhile.

I was mostly responding to the 'fart in a bottle bit'. Those questions were meant rhetorically, yes I got what your definition meant. Small thing though: say I saw that grocery list in impeccable handwriting, and I somehow found deeper meaning behind it, could you say it got 'elevated' to being art (for me at least), despite that not being it's original intention? Because if I dropped a bucket of paint, and the splatters somehow made the most beautiful composition ever, and that paintsplatter became famous worldwide, that 'work' would get in a strange position where it evokes the same emotions/responses as art, without it 'being' art. (Maybe we need a word for that. Art+accident=articcent?).

I guess I should have made clear I was trying to convey the difference (in my original statement at least, the one I quoted, we've been getting a little bit more broad after that) between 'this is considered art for the sake of it being art, it's art purely because it fits within the definition' and those works of art that actually have any sort of value or meaning to someone ('having value or meaning' being very subjective and personal of course).
So, if I fart in a bottle purely to try and make a quick buck by selling it as art/be contrarian, I think we maybe shouldn't take that too seriously. Sure, it may be art by definition, but seriously, it's a fart in a bottle. There are better things to pay attention to.

I know that's basically dividing art between 'serious art worthy of attention' and 'art only by name, not worthy of discussion' and that this is too personal to really come to a consensus, which is why I tried to give a hyperbolic example (which shouldn't be taken at face value too much). It's kinda like that philosophy discussion we had in The end is near: even though deep discussions are all well and good, we should try not to get carried away too much with ourselves, lest we move so far up our own ass we can see our own larynx.

[GreatWyrmGold]

That's a lot of new pages.

Not quite right, it should be pleasing to one's ear since that is a bit broader sounding.

"Pleasing to the ear" and "Pleasing to one's ear" mean basically the same thing. One just sounds more objective.

...and rap (if it can be called music);

...Quick guys, note down the date! This has to be the first time I can remember fully agreeing with GWG on anything.
A historical even t'be sure.

It's not the first time I've said that.
Although, coincidentally, that is one of the few things I agree with my elementary/middle-school music teacher on.
(We didn't get along too well.)

really? I mean, I pretty much never listen to stuff, but "it isn't music" is just plain bullshit. What kind of definition of music could you possibly have that doesn't include rap? unless it also doesn't include loads of other genres

See mine. And also clarifications below.

A mixture of rhythm, melody, and optionally lyrics that is pleasing to the ear.

Well, does this not qualify for all those?

It does, but it doesn't sound much like the rap I'm familiar with.
I'd call it more of a country/western song anyways. Its melody and themes are more typical of that genre than rap.
And to be perfectly fair, the verses wouldn't quite qualify as music by my definition. It's more the refrains that make it melodious enough to be indisputable music.

Rap includes rhythm, melody (sometimes), and lyrics. As for it not being pleasing to the ear, that's subjective. If I hated classical music, would I claim that it wasn't music at all? Of course not.
Also, FYI, the actual definition is

vocal or instrumental sounds (or both) combined in such a way as to produce beauty of form, harmony, and expression of emotion.

So yeah, rap is music.

The rap I'm familiar tends to have pretty much non-existent melody, and is rather displeasing to the ear. Rather noisy and dissonant.
Could there be rap that doesn't follow those conventions? Sure, but I haven't heard it.

GWG: Why do you argue?

Depends on the argument. Sometimes it's cathartic; sometimes I'm trying to influence the policy of the group (e.g, the argument on if we should cut ourselves out of the elevator or if we should just open the door); sometimes, people insult me, explicitly or no, and I'm fighting back; and sometimes, people are just wrong.
And I generally prefer the term "debate".

When it comes up to a subject like that, what does it matter how GWG feels about Rap? He's allowed to think it's "not music", he's just some random guy in the world. No offense, because hey, I'm another random guy. If GWG was some authority on music or culture, maybe I'd speak up, but he's not. So let him think what he wants to think, it's not like he's going to show up to Coachella or Rock the Bells and convince everyone to go home because rap concerts don't feature real music. He's not going to end a rap career or effect the genre. He can do his thing, and I can do mine.

Moreover, I don't particularly care if other people like rap, even if I don't consider it music. It's not like they're fans of 50 Shades of Gray or something.

So, basically, GWG is to the internet what I am in person.

Yeah...I try not to do that in person, that causes more issues.

PW, are you tired? You seem tired.

It's always a little obvious isn't it?

Fluffy semi-non-sequitur posts are a pretty big sign of sleepiness.

Rabbit cotton ball bumblebee...um...dust bunny...something else fluffy...
This made more sense before I typed it. Well, more less sense.
For me, a visible sign of sleep deprivation is usually that I either say I should get some sleep or else fall asleep lying on the table in front of them. (The latter happened once, after I spent all night awake watching most of the Harry Potter movies. I'm evidently not suited to all-nighters...)

This thread has suddenly turned awfully civil...

Once people get over the novelty of non-civility, why bother?

WHY THE FUCK IS SLEEP NECESARY, ANYWAY?!?

HUH?

xkcd has one on that, too.

WHY THE FUCK IS SLEEP NECESARY, ANYWAY?!?

HUH?

Don't you heal cuts and stuff faster while you're asleep? Or is that a myth?

How would you measure that? You'd need to cut someone in a way that it heals in hours rather than days or weeks.

I'd argue but I'm contemplating killing my character in another thread since people only remember his sex habits anyways.

We also remember his stupidity and inability to accept that souls exist despite overwhelming evidence.
Consider trying to develop your character in a non-suicidal-over-petty-things way.

MUTHERFUCKER YOU DON'TEVEN KNOW HOW TO DEPRIVE SLEEP YOU
YOU SEE THIS SHIT?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

MUTHERFUCKIN POWERPUFF GIRLS DEFENDERS OF TOWNSVILLE VIDOE GAME
THIS IS WHY I GET NO SLEPP

Pretty sure Civilization beats out that "vidoe game".

YOU THINK YOU CAN ARGUEN HTIS
WHAT YOU THINK THIS IS SOME KIND OF ARGUEMENT THREAD OR SOMETHING?

...What?

The fuck happened
This is why I dislike going to work

Glad to hear your job is so pleasant.

Why is this a problem. Abuse that power mang. Make it yours own. Knock up a lamp to get a flash light. Bust on a blunderbuss to birth a buncha...hand guns. Build an army of angry babies spawned from random objects. Set yourself up as a fertility god who grows fields of wheat via the expert help of sacred reverse-virgins and their surprisingly good aim.
The ability to impregnate random things is not a power you should be afraid of.

I'm pretty sure his ability only works on things with uteruses. Uteri? Is there even a plural or that word that--spellcheck likes uteri.
Huh.

Also, theres a good degree of irony here. I created this thread to contain the crap from other threads yet it appears to be producing crap of it's own. Some sort of over unity crap machine here.

At least the crap isn't in other threads!

Also @KJ, the more recent stuff may have been because your initial reaction to that new character sheet post was "Kyle needs to sleep with her.".

Yeah, that was...a blunder.

You know, that's a good idea for a plot. Kyle figures out how to abuse his powers and creates an army of his children and overthrows that MN bitch and then takes her and her army as slaves to further conchere Africa...

Familiar with Worm? Yeah...Murder Night isn't exactly a wimp. Good luck.

I don't know why my jokes about Kyle's sex life are taken seriously then.

They're not. They're jokes.

I leave for ~3 hours and we're in 5 more pages deep (woo 75~ posts).
...
I get a feeling this will continue?

At this rate? Other, unrelated games will start dumping their textual excrement here and it will turn into some sort of accelerating First Category Perpetual Motion Machine. A rather useless one that will suddenly die a few months in.

If it requires a constant input of energy, it fails the classical definition of a perpetual motion machine.
If it dies a few months in, it fails every definition of a perpetual motion machine.

Also, yes rap is music. You may not like it, and there's a bit much talking perhaps, but that doesn't means it's not music.
It's like those people that see a work of art they don't understand/like, and immediately dismiss it as 'that's not art'. Not to say everything is art in and of itself (one should be careful not to get carried away with arty-farty bullshit) but to make such rash categorizations is often not leading to anything worthwhile.

I don't like rap. I don't consider rap music. These two facts are not significantly related.
I like poetry and literature, even those aren't music. I like all sorts of things that aren't music or art.

On that note, the Scat style of music being very similar to rap could be called not music as well. And I don't see people trying to dismiss that.

...
Well, in my case, it's quite possibly because I've never heard of "scat" music. And given that its name is a synonym for excrement, I'm not sure I want to.

On that note, the Scat style of music being very similar to rap could be called not music as well. And I don't see people trying to dismiss that.

That means you discount this as music
You gonna get criticized son

Oh, that's scat?
Yup. Melody, harmony. Music. Arguably racist music, but still music.

Art is anything people intend to be art

I find this definition inherently distasteful because it allows literally anything to be art, if it's made with the right intent. Up to and including RC's bottled flatulence.
Mind, I don't have any better definition of "art," but I can work on definitions if you're more specific.

[Harry Baldman]

I was mostly responding to the 'fart in a bottle bit'. Those questions were meant rhetorically, yes I got what your definition meant. Small thing though: say I saw that grocery list in impeccable handwriting, and I somehow found deeper meaning behind it, could you say it got 'elevated' to being art (for me at least), despite that not being it's original intention? Because if I dropped a bucket of paint, and the splatters somehow made the most beautiful composition ever, and that paintsplatter became famous worldwide, that 'work' would get in a strange position where it evokes the same emotions/responses as art, without it 'being' art. (Maybe we need a word for that. Art+accident=articcent?).

No piece of art can become famous worldwide unless you display it to someone, and when you display it with artistic intent, it becomes art, I suppose. Similarly, that Marcel Duchamp didn't make the urinal, either, but he displayed it with artistic intent. So that means the definition becomes "as long as it's deliberately made, displayed or performed to provide someone with an aesthetic or ethical experience, it's art."

I guess I should have made clear I was trying to convey the difference (in my original statement at least, the one I quoted, we've been getting a little bit more broad after that) between 'this is considered art for the sake of it being art, it's art purely because it fits within the definition' and those works of art that actually have any sort of value or meaning to someone ('having value or meaning' being very subjective and personal of course).
So, if I fart in a bottle purely to try and make a quick buck by selling it as art/be contrarian, I think we maybe shouldn't take that too seriously. Sure, it may be art by definition, but seriously, it's a fart in a bottle. There are better things to pay attention to.

I'd say that all art that makes you feel something is valuable, and that a piece of Dadaist art is in that regard of equal or perhaps even greater artistic merit than many Renaissance masterworks, at least in my opinion. Bad art (like, say, a fart in a bottle, which is pretty passe as far as art goes, rather lacking in presence and unlikely to provoke much of a response if not placed somewhere totally incongruously and displayed in an impressive manner) is art that makes you feel nothing at all, pretty much, and everything else, no matter the emotion, succeeds at an artistic purpose of some kind. And if you make art with the purpose of selling it, you're still selling the object's ability to create experiences rather than the object itself, so it's still art you can discuss if you like.

I know that's basically dividing art between 'serious art worthy of attention' and 'art only by name, not worthy of discussion' and that this is too personal to really come to a consensus, which is why I tried to give a hyperbolic example (which shouldn't be taken at face value too much). It's kinda like that philosophy discussion we had in The end is near: even though deep discussions are all well and good, we should try not to get carried away too much with ourselves, lest we move so far up our own ass we can see our own larynx.

This also kind of fits into my definition of the quality of art - its ability to create a reaction. And since it's entirely up to the individual, their mindset, available information (depth of analysis) and upbringing whether they can sense something, perceptions of art are necessarily subjective.

And I do believe sticking your head up your own ass is the entire purpose of this thread, no?


Also, GWG, your definition of music is "music I like is real music, all else isn't". And it is true that anything can be art. As mentioned, you're conflating "art I enjoy and/or approve of" with "art that is", which is far more offensive than simply including all things intended as art. The only purpose for more specific definitions of art is to exclude things you don't like from it, which is a matter of ideology, not reason. An excuse to put artists you don't like down, pretty much.

[TCM]

As with several forms of music, Rap has very cultural roots. I can relate to what these people are talking about because I was raised in a similar environment. It's the same reason why I'm not into Country, because it's infused with a culture I wasn't raised and exposed to, though it is also obviously music.

GWG, you do know that the "Duty Calls" comic is satirical, right? I do know it's hard for people to get Satire, especially when it's in textual form. The comic meant to ridicule anyone who behaves similarly to the stick figure. If you can't take that from me, the real XKCD fans unanimously agree on that as well.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Also, GWG, your definition of music is "music I like is real music, all else isn't".

...
No, it isn't. I've given my definition of music previously, and in fact refuted that argument the post before yours. Do you even read what you're arguing against?

And it is true that anything can be art. As mentioned, you're conflating "art I enjoy and/or approve of" with "art that is", which is far more offensive than simply including all things intended as art. The only purpose for more specific definitions of art is to exclude things you don't like from it, which is a matter of ideology, not reason. An excuse to put artists you don't like down, pretty much.

Again, somethign being art isn't a compliment and something not being art isn't an insult. The computer I'm using to type this post isn't art, and Simultaneous Windows on the City is. (Probably, let's not get into definitions.) That doesn't mean that SWotC is somehow better than this computer, or that I like it more--both of those are false. Similarly, while few would argue that Civilization is art, and many would argue that The Last of Us is, I'd rather play Civilization than The Last of Us.
Art is art. Art is not superior. Stop saying it is.

As with several forms of music, Rap has very cultural roots. I can relate to what these people are talking about because I was raised in a similar environment. It's the same reason why I'm not into Country, because it's infused with a culture I wasn't raised and exposed to, though it is also obviously music.

Your point?

GWG, you do know that the "Duty Calls" comic is satirical, right? I do know it's hard for people to get Satire, especially when it's in textual form. The comic meant to ridicule anyone who behaves similarly to the stick figure. If you can't take that from me, the real XKCD fans unanimously agree on that as well.

Yes, I know it's satire. Yes, I know it's probably pointless to try and correct people. Yes, that comic describes my situation pretty well (save for the person asking me to come to bed). That's why I linked it, actually.
No, I'm not likely to stop trying.

[TCM]

As with several forms of music, Rap has very cultural roots. I can relate to what these people are talking about because I was raised in a similar environment. It's the same reason why I'm not into Country, because it's infused with a culture I wasn't raised and exposed to, though it is also obviously music.

Your point?

You're wrong?

[Harry Baldman]

No, it isn't. I've given my definition of music previously, and in fact refuted that argument the post before yours. Do you even read what you're arguing against?

"A mixture of rhythm, melody, and optionally lyrics that is pleasing to the ear." means "a particular subset of music that I like", because that's what "pleasing to the ear" means. It's music you like, and the idea of something being 'pleasing' means nothing else.

Again, somethign being art isn't a compliment and something not being art isn't an insult. The computer I'm using to type this post isn't art, and Simultaneous Windows on the City is. (Probably, let's not get into definitions.) That doesn't mean that SWotC is somehow better than this computer, or that I like it more--both of those are false. Similarly, while few would argue that Civilization is art, and many would argue that The Last of Us is, I'd rather play Civilization than The Last of Us.
Art is art. Art is not superior. Stop saying it is.

Let me put it this way. Say you picked a specific subset of humans, say, heroin addicts, and called them 'not actually people'. That doesn't really make them inferior from a technical standpoint, but the remark is disparaging nonetheless, don't you think? Similarly, by calling somebody's artistic effort with genuine artistic intent put behind it not art, you insult the artist quite gravely, as well as imply that their work is not fit to be judged from an artistic standpoint.

And Civilization is art, because it's made to provide you with an aesthetic and ethical experience - enjoyable visuals, the sense of progress and other sensations of that nature.

[Parisbre56]

GWG isn't ready...

[Parsely]

People who don't like rap music just don't like what it's associated with.

Rap is freaking art.