Welcome to Gaia! ::

Kupocake's avatar

Dangerous Capitalist

7,300 Points
  • Popular Thread 100
  • Entrepreneur 150
  • Profitable 100
xxellaxpopexx
Kupocake
I've been lurking this thread for quite a while now, and I have been trying to avoid commenting on it. But, I have to say, this is probably one of the longest, most drawn-out internet arguments I have seen on the AD in a long time. This is worthy of the Extended Discussion, with all of the pathetic little personal attacks and snobbery. No matter what side you are on, it's impossible to win over the other side. Everybody still holds steadfast to what they believe is true.

By the way, Tyrande Whisperwind, your signature is very ironic. Very.

I think thats the point, you have to admit though, its true~ XD
Everybody is wasting their time trying to convert the "other side" though. Nobody is going to give in here. Nobody. gonk

The only real truth is that the definition of "art" changes from person to person. Otherwise, all things are variable.
Tyrande Whisperwind
If the ninja guy studied as much as the doctor,

How does this not apply to the opinion of E.H. Gombrich in relation to yours or Stop Him's? Please explain.
Tyrande Whisperwind
Indeed it does.


Duly noted.

Quote:

"Without standards there is no such thing as art" is an opinion and it's not based on any knowledge, because it's a subjective term used to describe an object that pleases us. No one is more right or wrong than another.


You don't even understand what the term "standards for art" means. It has nothing to do with whether the image is pleasing. Goya's "Saturn Eating His Own Children" is incredibly unpleasant. So is Picasso's "Guernica" and pretty much everything ever painted by Bosch.

You are arguing that people find different kinds of art pleasing to look at. No ******** s**t. This is not Unchi's "art standards" argument at all.
Kupocake
Everybody is wasting their time trying to convert the "other side" though. Nobody is going to give in here. Nobody. gonk

The only real truth is that the definition of "art" changes from person to person. Otherwise, all things are variable.


It could be worse. We could be arguing about whether or not Naruto ruined anime for fans.

... or about whether or not vampires sparkle.
Kupocake's avatar

Dangerous Capitalist

7,300 Points
  • Popular Thread 100
  • Entrepreneur 150
  • Profitable 100
Meowhead
Kupocake
Everybody is wasting their time trying to convert the "other side" though. Nobody is going to give in here. Nobody. gonk

The only real truth is that the definition of "art" changes from person to person. Otherwise, all things are variable.


It could be worse. We could be arguing about whether or not Naruto ruined anime for fans.

... or about whether or not vampires sparkle.
VAMPRIES SPARKLE DUH OMG R U STUPID UR A H8TER RNT U OMG
ILL HAV U NO DAT MY HOLE FAMILY LIEKS TWILIGHT ND NATURO!!!!!!!!!!1

That kind of sounds like this thread. But about art. With better grammar. /s
Unchi-tan
Tyrande Whisperwind
If the ninja guy studied as much as the doctor,

How does this not apply to the opinion of E.H. Gombrich in relation to yours or Stop Him's? Please explain.


Tyrande Whisperwind

There isn't someone who knows more about "what is art" (wtf) than another, since it's entirely up to the individual how he sees it.



Apparently she doesn't believe that studying what people have defined art as in the past grants one any knowledge. There's your answer.
Kupocake
xxellaxpopexx
Kupocake
I've been lurking this thread for quite a while now, and I have been trying to avoid commenting on it. But, I have to say, this is probably one of the longest, most drawn-out internet arguments I have seen on the AD in a long time. This is worthy of the Extended Discussion, with all of the pathetic little personal attacks and snobbery. No matter what side you are on, it's impossible to win over the other side. Everybody still holds steadfast to what they believe is true.

By the way, Tyrande Whisperwind, your signature is very ironic. Very.

I think thats the point, you have to admit though, its true~ XD
Everybody is wasting their time trying to convert the "other side" though. Nobody is going to give in here. Nobody. gonk

The only real truth is that the definition of "art" changes from person to person. Otherwise, all things are variable.
Hey, there was about half a page where a few of us were actually discussing like adults. *sigh*

And to be honest, not everyone seems to be trying to sway the other faction. Quite a few people have been trying to make the point that opinions are opinions and neither are wrong.. but then the other side comes along and say "No! You're opinion is wrong! Mine is right!"

Just.. silly.
Tawdry Flame
Apparently she doesn't believe that studying what people have defined art as in the past grants one any knowledge. There's your answer.

User Image
Kupocake's avatar

Dangerous Capitalist

7,300 Points
  • Popular Thread 100
  • Entrepreneur 150
  • Profitable 100
designed freedom
Kupocake
xxellaxpopexx
Kupocake
I've been lurking this thread for quite a while now, and I have been trying to avoid commenting on it. But, I have to say, this is probably one of the longest, most drawn-out internet arguments I have seen on the AD in a long time. This is worthy of the Extended Discussion, with all of the pathetic little personal attacks and snobbery. No matter what side you are on, it's impossible to win over the other side. Everybody still holds steadfast to what they believe is true.

By the way, Tyrande Whisperwind, your signature is very ironic. Very.

I think thats the point, you have to admit though, its true~ XD
Everybody is wasting their time trying to convert the "other side" though. Nobody is going to give in here. Nobody. gonk

The only real truth is that the definition of "art" changes from person to person. Otherwise, all things are variable.
Hey, there was about half a page where a few of us were actually discussing like adults. *sigh*

And to be honest, not everyone seems to be trying to sway the other faction. Quite a few people have been trying to make the point that opinions are opinions and neither are wrong.. but then the other side comes along and say "No! You're opinion is wrong! Mine is right!"

Just.. silly.
Very silly. gonk
You know something is wrong when the 2-3 opposing parties start trying to define what an opinion is.
Kupocake
Very silly. gonk
You know something is wrong when the 2-3 opposing parties start trying to define what an opinion is.


OH s**t IT'S SOMEONE WITH AN OPINION! QUICK! GET THE PITCH FORKS!

biggrin

I had a nice post written out actually... but then I closed the tab so I decided: screw it.
Kupocake's avatar

Dangerous Capitalist

7,300 Points
  • Popular Thread 100
  • Entrepreneur 150
  • Profitable 100
Kendaroo
Kupocake
Very silly. gonk
You know something is wrong when the 2-3 opposing parties start trying to define what an opinion is.


OH s**t IT'S SOMEONE WITH AN OPINION! QUICK! GET THE PITCH FORKS!

biggrin

I had a nice post written out actually... but then I closed the tab so I decided: screw it.
*cowers in fear*

That happens to me all the time; sometimes I say to myself, "Ugh, they don't really need this."
I feel like writing out good, long answers to common questions on Notebook and copy+pasting them. I'm so tired of being the broken record.
Kaiser-chan
Some people think that women are inferior. This is their opinion. Some people think that gay people need to die. I'd like to be able to think that I can see these opinions as of perfectly reasonable quality and utterly equal with all others, but I can't. Maybe this is a flaw in me, not in opinions, but I doubt there are many people who can totally honestly and truthfully say that they can look at the opinion of someone who they find utterly and completely morally disgusting and consider that opinion to have equal value to anything they believe.


This is true.
Even though I said all opinions are equal I also think no human can weight their opinion the same as others (even if they're not disgusting/repulsive, but just because they're not you), but this is also what makes them the same. (I don't think that's a flaw, it's just how we are)

Logically speaking, you can think that guy's opinion is inferior because you think badly of him.
But on the other side, he can also be thinking badly of you and think your opinion's worse than his.
There is no measurement of this, since they're based on personal tastes, thus they're bound to be equal, logically speaking (emotionally, no).

Kupocake
Everybody is wasting their time trying to convert the "other side" though. Nobody is going to give in here. Nobody. gonk

The only real truth is that the definition of "art" changes from person to person. Otherwise, all things are variable.


Yes, but the point of a discussion is to discuss things like this - otherwise it'd be a boring "Hey I like green" - "Cool I like blue" *shake hands* *go away*

Unchi-tan

How does this not apply to the opinion of E.H. Gombrich in relation to yours or Stop Him's? Please explain.


Measurement scale, subjective term.

A doctor who's skilled (studied to be) can work better. A ninja who didn't, can not.
An artist who's skilled (practiced to be) can make better (relativey speaking, let's not get into it...) drawings.

And art? What art can do to be a better art? Following art standards doesn't make an art a better art. It makes better drawings. The value, idea, concept of "art" doesn't increase if the drawing's been well made or not, it increases the skill it's been made and how some may view it.

Major Malfunction

You don't even understand what the term "standards for art" means. It has nothing to do with whether the image is pleasing. Goya's "Saturn Eating His Own Children" is incredibly unpleasant. So is Picasso's "Guernica" and pretty much everything ever painted by Bosch.

You are arguing that people find different kinds of art pleasing to look at. No ******** s**t. This is not Unchi's "art standards" argument at all.


That's one way to view art as.
Some would say "this isn't art, this is a monstruosity!

My point remains.
Tyrande Whisperwind
An artist who's skilled (practiced to be) can make better (relativey speaking, let's not get into it...) drawings.

E.H. Gombrich is not an artist. He's an historian.
Kupocake's avatar

Dangerous Capitalist

7,300 Points
  • Popular Thread 100
  • Entrepreneur 150
  • Profitable 100
Tyrande Whisperwind
Kupocake
Everybody is wasting their time trying to convert the "other side" though. Nobody is going to give in here. Nobody. gonk

The only real truth is that the definition of "art" changes from person to person. Otherwise, all things are variable.


Yes, but the point of a discussion is to discuss things like this - otherwise it'd be a boring "Hey I like green" - "Cool I like blue" *shake hands* *go away*
As true as that may be, if you know that this debate will keep going until a moderator decides to lock it, why bother continuing to battle it out? Everybody is beating around the bush, and by the time you know it, you're back on square 1. If Unchi-tan, Tawdry Flame, Major Malfunction, or anybody else that is seriously opposing your ideas/opinion/whatever-you-call-it decides to quit this thread and leave the debate altogether, do you feel proud? Is there actual satisfaction behind it?
Unchi-tan
E.H. Gombrich is not an artist. He's an historian.


I never said he is.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get Items
Get Gaia Cash
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games