A cultural elite that rejects middle class values and censors debate - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-23-2009, 10:30 PM   #46
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,288
Local Time: 10:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Careers and investment involve risk taking and it seems people like the benefits of risks but they don’t want to deal with the losses in risk.
Not everyone wants a career in an office tower, working 9-5, or worse if you're me, for 40 years of their life.

Not everyone is capable of working in fields that you apparently find respectable and worthy. I don't know if you saw that Ken Robinson video, where he talks about the ballet dancer and how some people have to move to think, just like some have to paint, sculpt, sing, to express themselves.

Not everything has to be something that we can produce and that must have some economic value else the taxpayers are being ripped off. Frankly your posts are kind of scary in the sense that they sound just like snippets of the communist regime that I lived under as a child. They too would rather that we communally pick apples rather than create modern art.

Our world has immeasurably benefited from patronage of the arts. It's really sad that you don't see that.
__________________

__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 10:33 PM   #47
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Not everyone wants a career in an office tower, working 9-5, or worse if you're me, for 40 years of their life.
In a compressed time for more than adequate financial reward, I'd guess.

But I agree with the rest of your post.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 10:36 PM   #48
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,288
Local Time: 10:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
In a compressed time for more than adequate financial reward, I'd guess.
You'd probably guess right.

But even so, our attrition rates are so high that most people will never make it to the end line, so to speak.
__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 10:44 PM   #49
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,673
Local Time: 09:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Not everyone is capable of working in fields that you apparently find respectable and worthy. I don't know if you saw that Ken Robinson video, where he talks about the ballet dancer and how some people have to move to think, just like some have to paint, sculpt, sing, to express themselves.

Not everything has to be something that we can produce and that must have some economic value else the taxpayers are being ripped off. Frankly your posts are kind of scary in the sense that they sound just like snippets of the communist regime that I lived under as a child. They too would rather that we communally pick apples rather than create modern art.

Our world has immeasurably benefited from patronage of the arts. It's really sad that you don't see that.
Now this may be a hard analogy for some to swallow, but I think it's a lot like NASA. We spend billions upon billions on programs that really on the face value don't seem to benefit us in any direct way. I know many that think it's a completely useless waste. I mean what did us landing on the moon actually gain us other than bragging rights? But the technological advances that spun off from their research has benefitted us greatly. I mean shit they gave us velcro

I think in a way the NASA spending is to many artist very similar to the way art spending is to someone like Oscar...
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 11:14 PM   #50
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Nigerian immigrants into Ireland exploit the system, and do so disproportionately compared to immigrants from other countries
How do they disproportionately exploit the system? Are you saying that more of them are unemployed compared to other immigrant groups, or that they mostly do work but pay less in taxes relative to the amount of public funds they use, or that they're more often convicted of actual benefit fraud, or what?
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Some (Irish owned) construction companies have been known to have a de-facto 'no Irish' policy in recent years, because of the perception that Poles work harder and are less demanding regarding working hours and conditions.
Is it a perception or a reality? Are you arguing for these companies being required to make changes in those areas?
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2009, 05:53 AM   #51
pgv
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,979
Local Time: 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
But your location: "Regretfully, England."

So the multicultural paradise isn't all that great after all?
When you have a member of the BNP representing you in European Parliament, alas - it is not.
__________________
pgv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2009, 09:20 PM   #52
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 08:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Not everyone wants a career in an office tower, working 9-5, or worse if you're me, for 40 years of their life.

Not everyone is capable of working in fields that you apparently find respectable and worthy. I don't know if you saw that Ken Robinson video, where he talks about the ballet dancer and how some people have to move to think, just like some have to paint, sculpt, sing, to express themselves.

Not everything has to be something that we can produce and that must have some economic value else the taxpayers are being ripped off. Frankly your posts are kind of scary in the sense that they sound just like snippets of the communist regime that I lived under as a child. They too would rather that we communally pick apples rather than create modern art.

Our world has immeasurably benefited from patronage of the arts. It's really sad that you don't see that.
Communist? That's like calling Hayek a communist. What I'm saying is that it's probably a good idea for people who don't have much artistic talent to get a normal job and pursue art as a hobby. If the hobby becomes more then by all means go for it. Since I work hard for my money I would like some choice on what art I spend it on which would be anti-communist. I agree with some points in the video. Certainly there is degree inflation but I would want more details of what he's talking about. Doe he just want more funding or does he want teaching and testing to be different? If so, then how? Should we just cut checks to people who think they have talent and who will decide? That's why I think the market is better. I can understand getting people to the right schools that fit them better and alternative ways of teaching, but his mention of Al Gore gives me the "communist" shivers more than what I'm saying. The example he mentions is of someone who has a talent for dancing is a school placement problem but what if someone only thinks they have this talent? I think most people have jobs that they don't like 100% and this standard that we should only work in what we like (even conservatives push this dream) is not feasable for all and just setting people up for disappointment.

Even this article of his is too vague:

Sir Ken Robinson: Transform Education? Yes, We Must

To me if they taught more how great artists make great art and taught in a way that would create art consumers and artists then that would solve the problem. If you give someone a living to do art that few people want then I don't see the penetration of consciousness of the populace that enhances our way of life.

My mom was an artist (a very good one) but she couldn't do much with high quality landscape painting because so many people could do as well or better and since color photography was invented the demand for her paintings isn't something she could live off of. She worked as a hairdresser and didn't complain but kept her art as a hobby. I love to paint and draw but my talent isn't enough to live off of either. I work in accounting. It's hard work and some of it I like but much of it I'm averse to but I concentrate and do my best because I don't put any expectations that work is supposed to be entertaining or passionate all the time. Useful is good enough. Art will always exist because there is demand for it. The question is if the artist supplies what people want. This is the same criterion for any product. I'm not even touching on art that is more like political performance art to irritate people (Piss Christ for example) that most people would like a refund on.



So much art is just hackness and can actually devalue our experience of life. If someone likes "Piss Christ" they can go pay for it themselves. I'm not even Christian and I feel it's "arty farty" more than transcendent or sublime.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2009, 01:35 AM   #53
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 01:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Not everyone wants a career in an office tower, working 9-5, or worse if you're me, for 40 years of their life.

Not everyone is capable of working in fields that you apparently find respectable and worthy. I don't know if you saw that Ken Robinson video, where he talks about the ballet dancer and how some people have to move to think, just like some have to paint, sculpt, sing, to express themselves.

Not everything has to be something that we can produce and that must have some economic value else the taxpayers are being ripped off. Frankly your posts are kind of scary in the sense that they sound just like snippets of the communist regime that I lived under as a child. They too would rather that we communally pick apples rather than create modern art.

Our world has immeasurably benefited from patronage of the arts. It's really sad that you don't see that.
Letting the market decide, and ending up with America's Fattest Dancing Loser, probably shouldn't entitle one to attack the death of culture.

People are conditioned to view things on the basis of utility, it makes us fantastic consumers, and Oscar has learnt that if you're not part of the system then you're part of the problem.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2009, 10:11 AM   #54
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 08:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
Letting the market decide, and ending up with America's Fattest Dancing Loser, probably shouldn't entitle one to attack the death of culture.
Here I've got a solution for leftists that want more spending on social programs for the arts. They should make art that is actually interesting to the public then there will be more demand for public funding of arts.

Secondly have a school system that actually teaches people how to have good taste so they don't demand America's Fattest Dancing Loser but may be interested in Shakespeare. I don't like everything that is shown on TV or pop culture but at least I have a choice on what I subscribe to. America's Fattest Dancing Loser is no better than Piss Christ but with one I can boycott and the other is partially funded by the taxpayer. One is openly crap and the other is crap that pretends to be intellectual.

The reality is that many in the artistic community dislike "good taste" precisely because it's "Bourgeois" to listen to Chopin or Mozart so there's no consistency in their arguments. People used to value classical music and good literature and now they don't despite the increase in government programs. If anyone has a solution to decadence please write a book and change the world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
People are conditioned to view things on the basis of utility, it makes us fantastic consumers, and Oscar has learnt that if you're not part of the system then you're part of the problem.
The government should be focussed on creating a playing field for competition. Once people get out of art school they have to provide something that is attractive to people otherwise it's just making art for family and cronies. I don't see what is so wrong with a "system" that allows people to freely control their hard earned money. If there is degree inflation then it's obvious that there aren't enough jobs in many professional areas and that requires most people to get normal jobs. I don't see how creating artists to make art for a small group of people is any different than having fake finance sales jobs selling empty boxes. Both are the same problem. And if some woman has great dancing skills and got moved to a different school so she could be involved in successful musicals then she is supplying something that people want. Hurray!
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2009, 10:50 AM   #55
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,288
Local Time: 10:57 AM
We would live in a much more culturally poor world if things were left up to you, oscar. Thank God that they are not.

Bill Maher: New Rule: Not Everything in America Has to Make a Profit
__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2009, 12:37 PM   #56
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,673
Local Time: 09:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
We would live in a much more culturally poor world if things were left up to you, oscar.
Ew, I just had this chilling vision...
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2009, 08:32 PM   #57
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Secondly have a school system that actually teaches people how to have good taste so they don't demand America's Fattest Dancing Loser but may be interested in Shakespeare.
Yeah...good luck with that! Especially since arts programs are the first thing to get axed when school district budgets are found wanting. (And since local property taxes are the primary source of funding for US schools, guess which kids get the least exposure to arts education...been that way for decades.) At least literature is somewhat protected by its associations with reading and writing--i.e., subjects included on standardized tests.
Quote:
America's Fattest Dancing Loser is no better than Piss Christ but with one I can boycott and the other is partially funded by the taxpayer.
Serrano (the "Piss Christ" photographer) isn't publically supported himself; we don't have that here. That particular photograph happened to win a competition at a modern art museum, and the prize money happened to come partially from a government grant.
Quote:
The reality is that many in the artistic community dislike "good taste" precisely because it's "Bourgeois" to listen to Chopin or Mozart so there's no consistency in their arguments.
How many individuals' assertions are you basing this on? The snottiest comments by far I've heard about Chopin or Mozart fans came from hardcore classical afficionados turned off by the fact that people less fabulously knowledgeable than themselves enjoy those composers too, so they settle for sniffing disdainfully about how much more sophisticated Shostakovich and Mahler are. And frankly, even that kind of sentiment is fringe. The professional artists I've known would be the last people to say that everyone should ignore this or that artist because it's "bourgeois" to listen to them; artists generally have a fair amount of solidarity when it comes to the right to cultivate a following for your work, however much they personally might think it's crap. And who the hell talks like that, anyway? "Oh Mozart fans, they're so...so...[grimace]...bourgeois"? Is this another one of your Mao-Suit-Wearing-Professors-Gloating-About-Marx-Are-Plotting-To-Take-Over-The-World dystopia visions?
Quote:
I don't see how creating artists to make art for a small group of people is any different than having fake finance sales jobs selling empty boxes.
If you can't afford to fund artists, then you can't afford to fund artists, but otherwise I don't see how you can compare a painting to an empty box. The value is way, way more indeterminate.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 12:06 AM   #58
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 08:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
We would live in a much more culturally poor world if things were left up to you, oscar. Thank God that they are not.

Bill Maher: New Rule: Not Everything in America Has to Make a Profit
No not everything has to be profitable, but most activities have to or how else is there any money to distribute to the non-profitable activities? You would think after Bush and especially Obama that people would wake up. "Distributive justice" can only exist when others make profit. If you piggyback on them too much you kill the goose that lays the golden egg. Art spending is not a right. You've got to hand it to Bill Maher. He knows how to say the wrong thing at the wrong time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Ew, I just had this chilling vision...
Yeah so chilling. Culture made up from the people themselves instead of via bureaucrats. So chilling.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Yeah...good luck with that! Especially since arts programs are the first thing to get axed when school district budgets are found wanting. (And since local property taxes are the primary source of funding for US schools, guess which kids get the least exposure to arts education...been that way for decades.) At least literature is somewhat protected by its associations with reading and writing--i.e., subjects included on standardized tests.
I'm all for improving art education. The problem is when the artist or art consumer is out of school what did they actually learn? Most art consumption I've had has been my own research despite crappy high school art classes where methods of creating art were not taught. We were just marked on whether we took time on it and there was a clear vision of what was to be created. If I wanted to improve my sketching abilities I had to go at least to a book store and buy books that showed methods I could learn.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Serrano (the "Piss Christ" photographer) isn't publically supported himself; we don't have that here. That particular photograph happened to win a competition at a modern art museum, and the prize money happened to come partially from a government grant.
I'm not sure what you mean. Aren't government grants paid by the taxpayer? Wouldn't that be considered government support?

Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
How many individuals' assertions are you basing this on? The snottiest comments by far I've heard about Chopin or Mozart fans came from hardcore classical afficionados turned off by the fact that people less fabulously knowledgeable than themselves enjoy those composers too, so they settle for sniffing disdainfully about how much more sophisticated Shostakovich and Mahler are. And frankly, even that kind of sentiment is fringe. The professional artists I've known would be the last people to say that everyone should ignore this or that artist because it's "bourgeois" to listen to them; artists generally have a fair amount of solidarity when it comes to the right to cultivate a following for your work, however much they personally might think it's crap. And who the hell talks like that, anyway? "Oh Mozart fans, they're so...so...[grimace]...bourgeois"? Is this another one of your Mao-Suit-Wearing-Professors-Gloating-About-Marx-Are-Plotting-To-Take-Over-The-World dystopia visions?
Yeah like there aren't examples of anti middle class attitudes in art. Who are you fooling? It's even cool to be an artist/socialist. Even private paid for art that is profitable can have the same messages over and over again. Where are the conservative artists? Country music? It would probably be very hard for an artist to make art that is reverent to middle class types when irreverence has more "edge". Most artists want an edge and don't want to lose it as they get older. Making a pretty painting is "so 19th century".

It's funny that you mention my "dystopian visions" because there is a website I like that is supportive of classical academic paintings with chip-on-the shoulder articles defending themselves against the modern art circle.

Art Renewal Center� Scholarships and Programs with On-Line Museum

Quote:
For over 90 years, there has been a concerted and relentless effort to disparage, denigrate and obliterate the reputations, names, and brilliance of the academic artistic masters of the late 19th Century. Fueled by a cooperative press, the ruling powers have held the global art establishment in an iron grip. Equally, there was a successful effort to remove from our institutions of higher learning all the methods, techniques and knowledge of how to train skilled artists. Five centuries of critical data was nearly thrown into the trash. It is incredible how close Modernist theory, backed by an enormous network of powerful and influential art dealers, came to acquiring complete control over thousands of museums, university art departments and journalistic art criticism. We at the Art Renewal Center have fully and fairly analyzed their theories and have found them wanting in every respect, devoid of substance and built on a labyrinth of easily disproved fallacies, suppositions and hypotheses. If, dear reader, you are not already one of their propaganda successes, I encourage you to read on.
Laughably even here you can find more of the same radical claptrap:

ARC :: Han-Wu Shen :: "Every Word is Truth"

Throughout history artists have been known to be with loose morals and had to be taken with a grain of salt. I don't have quite as harsh an opinion as Plato of them and tend to feel that good art can be cathartic and have verisimilitude when it actually is done well. I can even force myself to enjoy portions of movies that have a left of center agenda if they are acted well and well told.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
If you can't afford to fund artists, then you can't afford to fund artists, but otherwise I don't see how you can compare a painting to an empty box. The value is way, way more indeterminate.
Hence when people choose for themselves it's hard for others to feel offended since it's someone elses money. For one person it's an empty box and for another it's a masterpiece. I like Eyes Wide Shut but many others feel that it's too slow with one too many Tom Cruise trips to the refrigerator. I own the movie and many others don't. Choice.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 04:01 AM   #59
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I'm all for improving art education. The problem is when the artist or art consumer is out of school what did they actually learn? Most art consumption I've had has been my own research despite crappy high school art classes where methods of creating art were not taught. We were just marked on whether we took time on it and there was a clear vision of what was to be created. If I wanted to improve my sketching abilities I had to go at least to a book store and buy books that showed methods I could learn.
I was more talking about what in my country is the growing problem of schools simply not having arts departments, period, or having just one or two part-time staff who're only able to offer specialized electives geared towards students interested in careers involving drawing or photography. The only school I ever attended (prior to college) which actually had art or music classes was the private high school I attended for junior and senior year; they had stuff like art history and music theory classes, which I found mindblowing, though even there, those were strictly electives and, sadly, I didn't have time to take them. There was a county-based student orchestra available as an afterschool activity through my elementary/junior high school, which I participated in for 8 years, but that was it.

You seem to be talking about basic visual arts technique classes and your objections to the pedagogical theories underlying the ones you took--I'm not sure I'm really in a position to comment on that. I think I kind of understand what you mean about sketching, because we enrolled our younger son, who has Tourette's and benefits from activities which build his concentration while being naturally enjoyable for him, in a technique-oriented kids' drawing class at the Y, since his elementary school's art classes seem to be more about art as freeform recreation rather than mastery of techniques. Which I don't necessarily think is a "bad" idea, especially for the lower grades, but in his case he obviously loves drawing and is fairly talented at it, so we figured, Why not capitalize on that in a context where he'll get the added pleasure of mastering some techniques that'll enable him to do more if he stays focused.

Do you think technique-oriented classes really suffice to make someone an informed consumer of art, though? In the US, even at the college level, studio art (or music performance) and art history (or music appreciation) tend to be treated as two separate tracks--there are people with studio art degrees and then there are people with art history degrees, and my impression is they mostly look down on each other (no, not over Marx or anything else 'political'). Music departments are somewhat less like that because most music majors are aiming for careers in music performance, but even there you often get pretty intense debates about how much time students should 'waste' on music history and theory vs. performance. We do have specialized arts colleges, but not many, and I couldn't tell you anything about them.
Quote:
I'm not sure what you mean. Aren't government grants paid by the taxpayer? Wouldn't that be considered government support?
I wouldn't consider having won one partially government-funded prize for one work to make you a 'government-supported artist,' no, which I thought was what you were complaining about (in Canada).
Quote:
Yeah like there aren't examples of anti middle class attitudes in art. Who are you fooling? It's even cool to be an artist/socialist.
Again, how many professional artists do you know? Art 'scenes' do vary a lot depending on where you are--or at least in the US they do--but I live in an area with a proportionately large concentration of artists, I know quite a few of them, and this just sounds to me like an unrecognizable caricature of the painters and musicians I know.
Quote:
Where are the conservative artists? Country music? It would probably be very hard for an artist to make art that is reverent to middle class types when irreverence has more "edge".
Mainstream country music is as much about entertainment as it is about music as art, so a lot of it can be derivative in the sense of endlessly recycling certain tropes and cliches expected by fans of the genre. And the same is true of mainstream rock music, of course. They involve an established image and style, they have certain characteristic aesthetic boundaries; that doesn't mean innovation and presence isn't possible for gifted artists working in whichever genre to achieve. You can certainly find overtly political artists in both genres, but to credit either in general with having significant political import is cheapening to real political discourse and participation, which is hardly their reason for being.
Quote:
Making a pretty painting is "so 19th century".
LOL. Try making a circuit of the commercial art galleries where I live and see what actually sells well. It's not the un-pretty stuff.
Quote:
It's funny that you mention my "dystopian visions" because there is a website I like that is supportive of classical academic paintings with chip-on-the shoulder articles defending themselves against the modern art circle.

Art Renewal Center� Scholarships and Programs with On-Line Museum

Laughably even here you can find more of the same radical claptrap:

ARC :: Han-Wu Shen :: "Every Word is Truth"
OK, now I'm completely befuddled as to what your point is or was. How is "a website...supportive of classical academic paintings...defending themselves against the modern art circle" an example of "radical claptrap"?
Quote:
Throughout history artists have been known to be with loose morals and had to be taken with a grain of salt.
Artists, writers and thinkers whose works have endured and had lasting, powerful cultural influence were almost by definition nonconformist and envelope-pushing in their own time, which tends to make one the subject of lots of nasty rumors and allegations, regardless of what the reality is. Plato's mentor Socrates was convicted for corrupting the youth by turning them against the gods of Athens; Thomas Aquinas wound up getting some of his followers--and quite possibly himself, though that's not clear--excommunicated for heresy; Shakespeare could never have won the hand of a respectable wealthy man's daughter in his day because he lived and worked in London's theater district, which 'proper' people considered a cesspool of debauchery, except of course when they felt like catching a boat across the Thames for a little entertainment themselves. Etc., etc., etc. Regardless of whether particular reverence for some great artist, writer or thinker tends to be stereotypically associated with being 'moral' 'conservative' today (since you seem to be treating the two as synonymous here), it's generally unlikely s/he was credited with being an exemplar of high ethical standards at the time.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2009, 08:02 AM   #60
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,673
Local Time: 09:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Yeah so chilling. Culture made up from the people themselves instead of via bureaucrats. So chilling.
Well not exactly what I was talking about.

What I was talking about is how out of touch with life that you are outside your bubble. And that being out of touch makes you very susceptible to 1950's paranoid McCarthyism type of "thinking".

I mean just look at these quotes, they are straight out of some bad propaganda film.

Quote:
It would probably be very hard for an artist to make art that is reverent to middle class types when irreverence has more "edge".
Quote:
Making a pretty painting is "so 19th century".
Quote:
Throughout history artists have been known to be with loose morals and had to be taken with a grain of salt.
Quote:
Who are you fooling? It's even cool to be an artist/socialist.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com