Your strongest belief -

***Nate*** · #31 10-11-2002, 01:57 AM

:

Originally posted by glukkon_daniel
Also, guess what: Not everyone is Christian. What is sacreligious to you is just fine and dandy to someone else.

I'm not Christian. When Pissed Christ (the photograph of a crusifix in a vat of urine) was being exhibited in Melbourne I was discussing it with one of my teachers. I said I didn't know what the fuss was about. He asked me how I would feel if it was a Jewish symbol in the same situation.

So know whenever I hear about a sacreligious piece of art I think about if it were something that were important to me. In other words: "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you"

Statikk HDM · #32 10-11-2002, 01:52 PM

Bad art is the best propaganda.

SeaRex · #33 10-11-2002, 06:27 PM

:

Nate Dog
I'm not Christian.

GD was replying to Statikk, not you.

:

Originally posted by Statikk HDM
Bad art is the best propaganda.

Hardly. Think of how many people actually appreciate art (good or bad) these days. Its barely an effective medium for propaganda. Religion, on the other hand...

sO fReAkIn oDd · #34 10-11-2002, 06:55 PM

Art is a point being made through a medium, like a canvas or a sculpture. Whether it's sacreligious or not I don't care. As long as the art has some sort of meaning and is not falsely exhibited as having meaning, it is art. I'm Christian but I'm not uptight about it. I wouldn't paticularly care if a person depicted anti-Christian/Jewish/Muslim/Minority photographs/sculptures/literature as art. As long it has a deep-rooted meaning I wouldn't care if anyone did it. I respect the views of others and don't feel it necessary to complain about how they convey their point on religious sentiments in the form of art.

***Nate*** · #35 10-14-2002, 01:29 AM

:

Originally posted by sO fReAkIn oDd
I respect the views of others and don't feel it necessary to complain about how they convey their point on religious sentiments in the form of art.

What about the views of the people who are insulted by bad art?

glukkon_daniel · #36 10-14-2002, 11:05 PM

"What about the views of the people who are insulted by bad art?"

Your views are perfectly fine. Just like the views of people who like "bad art." What we're complaining about is when you try to pass your opinion as a fact. If you say that you hate Mr. X's work, then that's ok. What's not ok is when you say that you hate Mr. X's work, so it should be banned.

molluck2 · #37 10-15-2002, 06:31 AM

my strongest believe is that i will become famous rapper, not like i'm now

Statikk HDM · #38 10-16-2002, 02:35 PM

Sea Rex, if you take the "liberal" meaning of art, you will see that bad art is the best propaganda. You think that a lot of people don't appreciate art, is the average braindead sitcom art. The average stupid Japinimation cartoon on the Fox Block? The average song on the radio? If it is good to you, you probably view it in a very selective, snooty "only the smart guys get it" attitude, just like me. And probably everyone on the board. Now, this will go quicker if everyone here admits that most "Art" they like, and most art in general, is complete trash.

SeaRex · #39 10-16-2002, 07:06 PM

:

Originally posted by Statikk HDM
Sea Rex, if you take the "liberal" meaning of art, you will see that bad art is the best propaganda. You think that a lot of people don't appreciate art, is the average braindead sitcom art. The average stupid Japinimation cartoon on the Fox Block? The average song on the radio?

If you view art in the same "liberal" respect that I do, than yes, it does make good propaganda... considering that's what it's intended to be. When you said "bad art is..." you didn't say that you meant "art" in the same context that I use it. Your "bad art" comment seemed to be nothing more than a tie-in for your "Sacrilegious Sentiments" statement, and in that sense it would be the kind of art that general public is not usually exposed to.

:

If it is good to you, you probably view it in a very selective, snooty "only the smart guys get it" attitude, just like me. And probably everyone on the board.

Oh PUH-lease, Statikk! First off, the word "snooty" couldn't even come close to describing any of my personality traits! You can't just assume that just because you're selective and snooty, that a love for art equals 'snootiness'. Secondly, you don't have to be smart to enjoy art... Just look at the examples you listed above. Or have we stopped talking about "liberal" views of art? Is that it? We're talking about "museum" art, now?

:

Now, this will go quicker if everyone here admits that most "Art" they like, and most art in general, is complete trash.

Yes, by all means, lets ALL just agree with Statikk for no good reason other than he is telling us to. OK, when you say "most" art, are you speaking of these liberal views again? Or are you saying that all of those lovely paintings, sculptures, and skethches should be tossed away as they are nothing more than trash? Jeebus, man. Every once in a while you'll get some crazy that sells his shit to famous museum, but that is a definite minority in the art world. And if you are still talking about art in the liberal sense, than yes, most TV is absolute crap. Happy?

ZombieX · #40 10-17-2002, 12:42 AM

:

Originally posted by SeaRex
If you view art in the same "liberal" respect that I do, than yes, it does make good propaganda... considering that's what it's intended to be. When you said "bad art is..." you didn't say that you meant "art" in the same context that I use it. Your "bad art" comment seemed to be nothing more than a tie-in for your "Sacrilegious Sentiments" statement, and in that sense it would be the kind of art that general public is not usually exposed to.

Oh PUH-lease, Statikk! First off, the word "snooty" couldn't even come close to describing any of my personality traits! You can't just assume that just because you're selective and snooty, that a love for art equals 'snootiness'. Secondly, you don't have to be smart to enjoy art... Just look at the examples you listed above. Or have we stopped talking about "liberal" views of art? Is that it? We're talking about "museum" art, now?

Yes, by all means, lets ALL just agree with Statikk for no good reason other than he is telling us to. OK, when you say "most" art, are you speaking of these liberal views again? Or are you saying that all of those lovely paintings, sculptures, and skethches should be tossed away as they are nothing more than trash? Jeebus, man. Every once in a while you'll get some crazy that sells his shit to famous museum, but that is a definite minority in the art world. And if you are still talking about art in the liberal sense, than yes, most TV is absolute crap. Happy?

If you view art in the same "liberal" respect that I do, than yes, it does make good propaganda...
So what "liberal" respect do you view art in?

it does make good propaganda...
Um.. doesn't that depend on the individual piece of art itself?

considering that's what it's intended to be.
Ahh, so you immediately assume that it's intended to be propoganda. And furthermore, you state that if it is so intended then that it must be.

When you said "bad art is..." you didn't say that you meant "art" in the same context that I use it.
You cannot put the word "art" into a context.

Your "bad art" comment seemed to be nothing more than a tie-in for your "Sacrilegious Sentiments" statement, and in that sense it would be the kind of art that general public is not usually exposed to.
And what in the world would be wrong with that, might I ask?

Oh PUH-lease, Statikk!
Aren't we getting all bedevilled!

First off, the word "snooty" couldn't even come close to describing any of my personality traits!
Just from that sentence you make yourself sound snooty. Snootball!

You can't just assume that just because you're selective and snooty, that a love for art equals 'snootiness'.
He never said that, so stop putting words into his mouth.

Secondly, you don't have to be smart to enjoy art...
No, you can be scruffy and still retain a certain amount of pleasure from it.

Just look at the examples you listed above. Or have we stopped talking about "liberal" views of art? Is that it? We're talking about "museum" art, now?
Wow! You really are confusing yourself, aren't you!

Yes, by all means, lets ALL just agree with Statikk for no good reason other than he is telling us to.
Sounds good to me.

OK, when you say "most" art, are you speaking of these liberal views again? Or are you saying that all of those lovely paintings, sculptures, and skethches should be tossed away as they are nothing more than trash?
Shut up. Stop creating this bullcrap repetition of "liberal" art. You sound like John Kennedy. skethches. ha.

Jeebus, man. Every once in a while you'll get some crazy that sells his shit to famous museum, but that is a definite minority in the art world.
You consider it "crazy" to make money out of giving you excrement to a museum? Oh well. As it's a minority in "the art world" let's just conveniently put the issue aside and ignore it.

And if you are still talking about art in the liberal sense, than yes, most TV is absolute crap.
You're the only retarded moron farting on about liberal this and liberal that. And most TV you watch is crap.

Happy?
Ecstatic I'm sure.

SeaRex · #41 10-17-2002, 07:07 PM

:

Originally posted by ZombieX
So what "liberal" respect do you view art in?

Well, if you bothered to read some of my earlier posts...

:

Ahh, so you immediately assume that it's intended to be propoganda. And furthermore, you state that if it is so intended then that it must be.

so nice of you to answer your own question. And what exactly am I immediately assuming is propaganda? I'm not the one that thinks bad art makes the best propaganda. And I'm certainly sorry my quote seemed that way to you. I was looking from the viewpoint of the artist, sorry...

:

You cannot put the word "art" into a context.

Sure you can. Although, you may not be able to express a work of art in mere words.

:

And what in the world would be wrong with that, might I ask?

Absolutely nothing. All I was doing was clearing up what could have been an even bigger misunderstanding than what we have now. It was meant to show that "museum quality" art isn't as known to the public as, well... a crappy anime show on the fox block.

:

Aren't we getting all bedevilled!

*gasp* Why, I do declare! I most certainly am!

:

Just from that sentence you make yourself sound snooty. Snootball!

How? I'm just saying that I'm not a snooty person. And if describing yourself in a slightly angered tone is "snooty', well than go ahead and call me a Snootball! Whee!

:

He never said that, so stop putting words into his mouth.

I'm not. He said that he was selective and snooty. If anything, he was putting words into the mouth of everyone on the board.

:

Wow! You really are confusing yourself, aren't you!

Wow! No, I'm not!

:

Sounds good to me.

*snort* You conformist bastard!

:

Shut up.

No.

:

Stop creating this bullcrap repetition of "liberal" art.

It's not bullcrap. I'm simply making sure that Statikk and I are talking about the same kind of art. The whole "liberal art" phrase is meant to represent more "well known" art forms such as television and music, rather than a cross stuck in a bucket of piss. Besides, I'm not who brought up the concept of liberal art...

:

You sound like John Kennedy.

I have to commend you on your wit for that one. Seriously. That hurt... if there is one way to insult me, that would be it.

:

You consider it "crazy" to make money out of giving you excrement to a museum? Oh well. As it's a minority in "the art world" let's just conveniently put the issue aside and ignore it.

I'm hardly am ignoring the issue! If you would just read Statikk's posts! OK... deep breath, count to ten. I'm better. Statikk said that most art is crap, and gave the example of the guy who sold shit to a famous museum. I said that sort of thing was a minority in the art world, and therefore does not count as "most art". That seems just about on topic to me.

:

You're the only retarded moron farting on about liberal this and liberal that. And most TV you watch is crap.

My, my, my. Have we been reduced to petty insults? Now who's bedivilled? I'm sorry if my "most TV is crap" offended you in some way... I was replying to a post in which "liberal art" was brought up, and I stuck in the phrase where I felt it was needed. I may have been a bit... sarcastic and hasty on the subject... but oh well. People make mistakes. People move on...

:

Ecstatic I'm sure.

Well it was nice of you to answer for Statikk. I'm glad you two are happy.

ZombieX · #42 10-17-2002, 09:10 PM

Well, if you bothered to read some of my earlier posts...
Oh, they were worth reading were they?

so nice of you to answer your own question. And what exactly am I immediately assuming is propaganda? I'm not the one that thinks bad art makes the best propaganda. And I'm certainly sorry my quote seemed that way to you. I was looking from the viewpoint of the artist, sorry...
Ahh, you're confusing yourself again. Never mind.

Sure you can. Although, you may not be able to express a work of art in mere words.
"Mere words" my eye.

Absolutely nothing. All I was doing was clearing up what could have been an even bigger misunderstanding than what we have now. It was meant to show that "museum quality" art isn't as known to the public as, well... a crappy anime show on the fox block.
That's where you're wrong.

*gasp* Why, I do declare! I most certainly am!
Tally ho!

How? I'm just saying that I'm not a snooty person. And if describing yourself in a slightly angered tone is "snooty', well than go ahead and call me a Snootball! Whee!
You missed my point. But then many of my posts are misconstrueable.

I'm not. He said that he was selective and snooty. If anything, he was putting words into the mouth of everyone on the board.
Oh Jesus, it's been a long day.

Wow! No, I'm not!
I'm glad you think so. See, from where I am, you have misunderstood EVERYTHING I intended so far.

*snort* You conformist bastard!
Come meet me, then we'll see who's conformist.

No.
Okay, I will after this post. No doubt you'll waste your time making a hot headed smart ass response, but unfortunately for you I won't read it.

It's not bullcrap. I'm simply making sure that Statikk and I are talking about the same kind of art. The whole "liberal art" phrase is meant to represent more "well known" art forms such as television and music, rather than a cross stuck in a bucket of piss. Besides, I'm not who brought up the concept of liberal art...
I'm glad to know you take it upon yourself to classify art.

I have to commend you on your wit for that one. Seriously. That hurt... if there is one way to insult me, that would be it.
I'm sorry if it insulted you. It certainly wasn't intended too.

I'm hardly am ignoring the issue! If you would just read Statikk's posts! OK... deep breath, count to ten. I'm better. Statikk said that most art is crap, and gave the example of the guy who sold shit to a famous museum. I said that sort of thing was a minority in the art world, and therefore does not count as "most art". That seems just about on topic to me.
Therefore you are conveniently putting the issue aside and ignoring it.

My, my, my. Have we been reduced to petty insults? Now who's bedivilled? I'm sorry if my "most TV is crap" offended you in some way... I was replying to a post in which "liberal art" was brought up, and I stuck in the phrase where I felt it was needed. I may have been a bit... sarcastic and hasty on the subject... but oh well. People make mistakes. People move on...
Oh, I'm so "bedivilled". And offended. I suffer a broken heart. "I stuck in the phrase where I felt it was needed"? That's one way to use language.

Well it was nice of you to answer for Statikk. I'm glad you two are happy.
Yep, just you go one thinking I was answering for him. Well, we are so happy. The perfect couple in fact, aren't we just Statikk?

Nice meeting you, "SeaRex". Oh, yes.. ahh, I'd better not say it, you'd be offended!

SeaRex · #43 10-18-2002, 07:08 PM

:

Originally posted by ZombieX
Oh, they were worth reading were they?
Ahh, you're confusing yourself again. Never mind.

Cheap shots. I'm really trying to give the conversation some redeeming values. I don't want to have an all out flame war with you, I would just like to discuss this in a mature manner, if at all possible. And you might want to start reading previous posts, as they might just contain vital information...

:

"Mere words" my eye.

So you can define a work of art, but not the word "art" itself?

:

That's where you're wrong.

Well, it would certainly be nice if you told me why I was wrong.

:

I'm glad you think so. See, from where I am, you have misunderstood EVERYTHING I intended so far.

Well God knows you certainly aren't helping at ALL at this point. If I didn't understand the point, than correct me, rather than replying with these vague, slightly-insulting remarks.

:

Okay, I will after this post. No doubt you'll waste your time making a hot headed smart ass response, but unfortunately for you I won't read it.

Pity. In spite of the way my post sounds, I did wish to continue the conversation. *shrugs* Oh well, just means I get the last word. Of course, I could give you a hot-headed curse out if you like, but then again, you aren't even reading this...

:

I'm glad to know you take it upon yourself to classify art.

I was only trying to clear up a misunderstanding. At least one of us is. Besides, I was asked to give my definition of art before. If you bothered to read my previous posts, I wouldn't have to restate it.

:

I'm sorry if it insulted you. It certainly wasn't intended too.

Hey, that's OK. I didn't think you would be losing any sleep over it anyway.

:

Therefore you are conveniently putting the issue aside and ignoring it.

Yes, I would be ignoring it if the issue was "Why most art is crap", which of course, it isn't.

:

Yep, just you go one thinking I was answering for him. Well, we are so happy. The perfect couple in fact, aren't we just Statikk?

Surely, you knew I was being sarcastic. And I know this is an open forum, but you certainly have shown enough sense in the past to know who I was replying to.

:

Nice meeting you, "SeaRex". Oh, yes.. ahh, I'd better not say it, you'd be offended!

Please, call me Luke, "ZombieX". I really would like for you to reply. Perhaps we can continue the converstaion in a somewhat more sensible manner. Perhaps not. Either way, it was nice meeting you, too. And, by all means, go ahead and insult me again. It certainly can't be any worse than your JK comment...

glukkon_daniel · #44 10-20-2002, 04:14 AM

GOD. Can one of you people out there who agrees with ZombieX argue in an "I-am-not-a-complete-asshole-who-is-five-years-old-and-cannot-exprees-my-opinion-in-an-understandable-way-so-I-will-post-stupid-insults-toward-whoever-does-not-agree-with-me" way? Anyone?

ZombieX · #45 10-20-2002, 03:16 PM

:

Originally posted by glukkon_daniel
GOD. Can one of you people out there who agrees with ZombieX argue in an "I-am-not-a-complete-asshole-who-is-five-years-old-and-cannot-exprees-my-opinion-in-an-understandable-way-so-I-will-post-stupid-insults-toward-whoever-does-not-agree-with-me" way? Anyone?

Can you?

glukkon_daniel · #46 10-21-2002, 07:55 PM

ZombieX · #47 10-21-2002, 10:19 PM

So can I.

Wanna know how fucked up I really am?

That shit was just reminiscing of a time and a person only Max knows about.

If you go back and read you may notice every one of my points was deliberately provocative. Oh well. At least I saw a clinical psychologist this morning.

Jacob · #48 10-22-2002, 12:51 PM

Are you a psycho or something? (Serious question) Wot did you do to get to see one of those peeps?

ZombieX · #49 10-22-2002, 11:25 PM

:

Originally posted by Jacob
Are you a psycho or something? (Serious question) Wot did you do to get to see one of those peeps?

Are you a psycho or something?
Yes.

Wot did you do to get to see one of those peeps?
Absolute sweet fuck all... it seemed like a good idea at the time.

As it turned out, it was a waste of time.

The Red Muse · #50 11-06-2002, 03:44 PM

I believe in my clear-headed-attitude and friendship. Meaning, I'm not a dreamer nor romantic. I've found out(and seen) that love is not eternal, it doesn't last. But, friendship can last forever, if ya know how to treat it. That one was dedicated to my dear and only friend Laura, who's actually more of a sister to me, than just a friend. ^^ Pace out!

Statikk HDM · #51 11-08-2002, 06:15 PM

I would like to say this: There is pure art and there is Saturday Morning Cartoon art. I like them both. I think that most every other kind of thing that is not kick arse bubblegum for the masses or pure art is mislabled when you call it art. David and The Tick is art. P!$$ Christ isn't.

SeaRex · #52 11-08-2002, 06:54 PM

:

Originally posted by Statikk HDM
I would like to say this: There is pure art and there is Saturday Morning Cartoon art. I like them both. I think that most every other kind of thing that is not kick arse bubblegum for the masses or pure art is mislabled when you call it art. David and The Tick is art. P!$$ Christ isn't.

... fair enough.