Post #256,999
5/27/06 7:26:43 PM
|
So, please, tell me. Is there such "thing" as beauty?
Is there anything to it beyond "that which I find pleasing"? In other words, is there really an objective beauty, independent from the observer?
Please answer yes or no.
As to the art you're refering to, I find some of it intellectually stimulating. It's as if the authors were really capabale of producing something beautiful, but decided to show that ability in the most indirect way they could. I wonder if the things you find beautiful are the result of your effort to extract the art out of hiding. IOW, I wonder if you're the real author of the beauty, not mr Moore or what's his name.
------
179. I will not outsource core functions.
--
[link|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm|.]
|
Post #257,011
5/28/06 3:12:39 AM
|
Point = missed.
You seem to be making a habit of this with my posts.
The WHOLE POINT of my post is that there's no such thing as objective beauty.
I don't really mind either way if you think Moore's stuff is beautiful or looks like dog turds.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
|
Post #257,015
5/28/06 11:17:27 AM
|
Not really missed
I just couldn't bring myself to believe that you'd say "no".
Well, welcome to the brave new world, where dog turds are as good as Michelangelo, and rap may be even better than Bethoven. Wake me up when you folks will reach the ultimate reward of your beliefs. I'd rather sleep through the whole process, if I may.
------
179. I will not outsource core functions.
--
[link|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm|.]
|
Post #257,035
5/28/06 9:25:52 PM
|
Yeah, you have.
You've got stuck on disliking the stuff I linked to. Which is fair enough, but whether you like it or not doesn't alter my point.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
|
Post #257,020
5/28/06 11:59:35 AM
|
I have to apologise here
As Beep reminded me, I made a huge assumption about you, an assumption that I would not make about, say, mmoffitt. I assumed that you and I are the same "type" of observer, and in our discussion only that particular type matters. I was wrong. You are indeed a different type. No discussion about beauty is possible between us. And you were right, the "objective beaty" does not exist as far as you and I are concerned. We are too different.
I have to ask you another question, though. Is there anything that some people call "beautiful" that you would call "ugly" (Pontiac Aztec not included)? In the area of art, I mean.
------
179. I will not outsource core functions.
--
[link|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm|.]
|
Post #257,034
5/28/06 9:23:24 PM
|
You're still missing the point
The point was not whether I can have a discussion about beauty with anyone; I just picked three things that I know I find beautiful but which are probably examples of the kind of thing that wreck Marlowe's "There is an objective standard of beauty" argument - it takes a particular kind of brain to regard Jesu's music as beautiful.
Art that some people call beautiful but which I regard as ugly? Roy Lichtenstein. Andy Warhol. Jackson Pollock. Pop Art in general. I also regard most naive art as fairly horrible. Stuff like [link|http://images.google.com/images?svnum=100&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&c2coff=1&client=safari&rls=en-us&q=naive+art&btnG=Search|this].
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
|
Post #257,189
5/30/06 1:44:21 PM
|
those pictures are loverly
Of course I like dogs playing poker on black velvet so what do I know.
thanx,
bill
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
|
Post #257,185
5/30/06 1:08:15 PM
|
The Pontiac Aztek has a face...
...(and an arse) only a GM designer could love....
jb4
"So don't pay attention to the approval ratings that say 68% of Americans disapprove of the job this man is doing. I ask you this, does that not also logically mean that 68% approve of the job he's not doing? Think about it. I haven't."
— Stephen Colbert, at the White House Correspondent's Dinner 29Apr06
|
Post #257,201
5/30/06 2:07:24 PM
|
Grargh.
That's grim.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
|
Post #257,017
5/28/06 11:36:05 AM
|
Independent from the observer? No.
While it is altogether likely that you and I and Peter and everyone else here would find the same painting "beautiful"..say Van Gogh's Nightwatch...this is NOT an objective standard...this is a common perception among humans with similar programming.
And since we have "common programming", I also agree with you that some of the "shit" that passes for art (including shit :-)) is indeed shit.
doesn't change the point I made nor the point Peter made, however.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #257,018
5/28/06 11:47:55 AM
|
I guess I have to agree
about "human" and "common programming". The problem starts when "programming" gets so vague that anything goes. Or when the carriers of a particular kind of "programming" decide that their programming is the only one in the world that does not deserve respect.
The reason a "programming" survives is because it's advantageous for a society to have it. When the society decides to eliminate its own concept of beauty, the society is sick or suicidal.
------
179. I will not outsource core functions.
--
[link|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm|.]
|
Post #257,019
5/28/06 11:59:25 AM
|
And I with you
Just because there is no "objective" standard doesn't mean there cannot be a common belief. I find the defense of some of the "art" now to be troubling in that fashion.
The vehemence to defend the most marginal simply means that people are wiling to suspend their consideration of the greater good in persuit of anarchy.
The care is in where the line is drawn...which is where most err on the side of caution...hence open displays of fesces in major museums and galleries.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #257,021
5/28/06 12:08:16 PM
|
s /Van Gogh/Rembrandt perhaps?
|
Post #257,022
5/28/06 12:20:25 PM
|
Yeah...my bad.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #257,024
5/28/06 2:03:07 PM
|
Not I
I had never ween Night Watch, so I just googled it. Granted painting/art will always look better when actually view, I found Night Watch a painting that I would easily pass on. Just not something that I'd be interested in owning or viewing.
In Minneapolis there is a sculpture of a huge spoon and cherry. I consider it interesting, but not worth the money spent.
Common perceptions/programming? Dunno. Unless you want to define it as what the majority believes is beautiful.
I think I'll stick to my statement that there is no Objective Beauty. Beauty is completely subjective. What I think is beauty, is beautiful, no matter what you may think. And, of course, the reverse is also true.
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort. (Herm Albright)
|
Post #257,026
5/28/06 5:54:29 PM
|
Its a huge painting
and it catches you when you stand in front of it.
But your statement is one more nail in the coffin of the notion of objective beauty.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #257,027
5/28/06 6:31:51 PM
|
Yabbut
Without there being an objective standard of beauty, if beauty is subjective, if it varies from individual to individual, from culture to culture, how can one rationalize controlling what art the public is allowed to see with 'freedom'? How can you tighten the noose areound the neck of 'freedom of speech'?
Objective standards of beauty and art are necessary to the next step in der Master Plan. It is necessary to that these standards appear unlinked to a particular religion, as well (you know, like 'creation science'). Therefore the declaration of 'humanism'.
Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #257,036
5/28/06 9:27:26 PM
|
And we will burn that which fails the test!
For the greater good!
That's where this crypto-fascistic bullshit of Marlowe's leads.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
|
Post #257,065
5/29/06 12:52:31 PM
|
Um...
you have been reading me in this thread, right?
You can't.
The problem is that this inability is now being taken advantage of by the fringe who know that no matter what now (let me throw shit at religious artifacts...I'll call it art and they'll >have< to let me show it) they'll will be able to gain noteriety.
Its "shock art"...and the emphasis is on shock...cause I don't even think the folks making it think its art either. They're "making a statement".
And you know full well that I understand this as the "dark side" of freedom...and that its necessary to endure. I don't go, don't give it my money...vote with my feet.
Same with satellite radio. Stern went there. I will not. Again, voting with my feet.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #257,072
5/29/06 6:09:12 PM
|
ROFL... Come now, Beep!
I actually agree - but 'shock art' is a form of communication as well.
My point was that this whole 'tempest' was caused by our own 'private dick''s laying a background for censoring art (probably in the name of saving the cheeeldrun).
Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #257,073
5/29/06 6:25:01 PM
|
Oh, come on now - 'Saving the Cheeeldrun' is . . .
. . so "Last Century". Surely there must be a way to link "art" and "objective beauty" to the pressing need for National Security.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #257,074
5/29/06 6:35:41 PM
|
Here's how:
Art - appreciated by the loyal (I'm feeling uplifted just looking at it. Or I've got flatulence. One or t'other):
[image|http://www.skylinepictures.com/Freedo1.jpg||||]
Shit - viewers are terrorists and could do with a good arresting:
[image|http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f4/The_Scream.jpg/463px-The_Scream.jpg||The work of a left-wing mentalist||]
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
|
Post #257,191
5/30/06 1:47:36 PM
|
why dont you like the picture of a labrador wearing a coat?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
|
Post #257,687
6/4/06 12:28:30 PM
|
Gah! I've seen "Glory to CPSU"posters that were better made.
------
179. I will not outsource core functions.
--
[link|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm|.]
|
