Waemoth Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, soon said: No to both. And obviously I dont come across as triggered, its just a lazy term people throw around for lack of an original statement. But it remains you compared art criticism to being ISIS! lol Who is doing that? Anyone who criticize a piece of art based on the ideas they believe it to convey do so indirectly. By arguing for that paintings such as this should be frowned upon, you are damaging the artistical freedom of tomorrow's artist. I know that you won't agree, but that's liberalism vs authoritarianism for you. Edited June 27, 2018 by Waemoth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
action Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 1 minute ago, Scream of the Butterfly said: Who in this thread has said that anything should be forbidden? did I say anyone did? relax, it's all good. I'm criticising concepts, not people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soon Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 1 minute ago, Waemoth said: Anyone who criticize a piece of art based on the ideas they believe it to convey do so indirectly. By arguing for that paintings such as this should be frowned, you are damaging the artistical freedom of tomorrow's artist. I know that you won't agree, but that's liberalism vs authoritarianism for you. I dont agree. But not based on the framework you put forward. No one is calling for anything to be burned. Thats a huge overreaction to what is in fact a very engaging conversation for those interested in it. The idea that art should be viewed passively reduces what art is. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
action Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 1 minute ago, soon said: I dont agree. But not based on the framework you put forward. No one is calling for anything to be burned. Thats a huge overreaction to what is in fact a very engaging conversation for those interested in it. The idea that art should be viewed passively reduces what art is. there are a lot of people "out there" who would burn art, and who have done so in the past many times before. I'm all for a debate on the morality of art, don't get me wrong. I dont have a problem with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waemoth Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, soon said: I dont agree. But not based on the framework you put forward. No one is calling for anything to be burned. Thats a huge overreaction to what is in fact a very engaging conversation for those interested in it. The idea that art should be viewed passively reduces what art is. I'm not trying to say that anyone's trying to destroy existant art, sorry if I came off that way. I was trying to say that I believe that banning art doesn't have to be through legalislation, but that it can also through norms shared by the population. I don't agree, but I get where you're coming from. Edited June 27, 2018 by Waemoth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soon Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 Just now, action said: there are a lot of people "out there" who would burn art, and who have done so in the past many times before. I'm all for a debate on the morality of art, don't get me wrong. I dont have a problem with that. Im speaking to the content of this thread when I say no one wants to burn anything. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 10 minutes ago, Scream of the Butterfly said: Well, no. It doesn't capture anything of the victim's experience. She looks almost like she's having an orgasm or trying to pose sexy with her head bent backward, eyes closed, mouth open. Why would anybody sit on the ground in that position with that expression after having been sexually assaulted? Who in this thread has said that anything should be forbidden? No it depicts a victim, then sexualizes it maybe, but still that character has to be there to get to the next page. You have movies about serious stuff with Brad Pitt. There’s different layers to art, things get stylized. And who know how long you lead someone down a path before you make the point. Not that you have to. I’m arguing against the simplification of interpretation to fit an agenda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soon Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 If we all seem to agree that abolishing works of art is misguided, then what do we make of works of art that call for cultural abolition? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waemoth Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 5 minutes ago, soon said: If we all seem to agree that abolishing works of art is misguided, then what do we make of works of art that call for cultural abolition? I think any art should be accepted, unless it explicitly argues for physical or mental harm towards groups of people, people in general, or animals. That would fulfill neither of those criteria, and as such I'm all for it being allowed, even though I entirely disagree with it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soon Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 4 minutes ago, Waemoth said: I think any art should be accepted, unless it explicitly argues for physical or mental harm towards groups of people, people in general, or animals. That would fulfill neither of those criteria, and as such I'm all for it being allowed, even though I entirely disagree with it. DADA would say that disagreeing with DADA is agreeing with DADA Its a tough question about whether DADAs logical extent would harm people. They were pacifists but called for the undoing of capitalism and its benefiting classes. It challenged every known structure when it comes down to it. I love Dadaism personally. Its lineage went on to include the Situationalists who in turned inspired Black Mask/Up Against The Wall Motherfuckers in NYC in late 60's and early 70's. Black Mask/Motherfuckers collective was not at all opposed to using violence - during the hippie era no less. They are also responsible for making Woodstock Festival free by stealing a bunch of sleeping bags and supplies and handing the out to the poor before cutting the chainlink fence and leading the rush of 1000's of people flooding in. So that is sometimes mentioned as the high water mark of the peace movement. So unless Black Mask represents a schism with the original manifestos, the outcome is mixed bag I guess. I think if one could simplify the potential outcomes of their 'goals' is would be that they only sought to prefigure a peaceful future. And playfully and defiantly insisted on living in that non existent present. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appetite4illusions Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 3 hours ago, wasted said: I had the two toughest GNR shirts. The Axl One in a Million shirt and the Stoned in LA shirt. I wish I still had them. I busted out of OIAM in my 20s. I cut it up for dusters. I remember explaining the words on the front to a teacher at school. Then showing her the Lies cover on the back. Isn't it hilariously ironic that the "Stoned in LA" shirt was used to promote the Rolling Stones gigs and those were the shows that Axl chose to publicly dismiss his band-mates for being junkies? Hello! Who is our merchandiser! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killuridols Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 2 hours ago, wasted said: I think there’s a dog eat dog message there at least. If it was just rape then why the robot looking up going oh shit? But yes RB is also being exploitative/commercial. Welcometothejungle That’s a tendency, to just pounce on the image of something bad, and take it literally. Just use it to fit an agenda. Who has an agenda? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waemoth Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, killuridols said: Who has an agenda? Anyone arguing for anything ever had an agenda. For an example, my agenda here is to inform you of that. Don't try to deflect criticism by feigning ignorance. Edited June 27, 2018 by Waemoth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killuridols Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 11 minutes ago, Waemoth said: Anyone arguing for anything ever had an agenda. For an example, my agenda here is to inform you of that. Don't try to deflect criticism by feigning ignorance. I ain't no feigning anything. My question is genuine and I want it responded by Wasted, not by his rottweiler. But if you want a question from me that is.... what is your freaking problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waemoth Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, killuridols said: I ain't no feigning anything. My question is genuine and I want it responded by Wasted, not by his rottweiler. But if you want a question from me that is.... what is your freaking problem? Pirmarily that you seem to be so sure about being right that you refuse to try to understand the opinions of other, and instead take to ridiculing their positions. Additionally, I feel that you're not arguing as much as saying "this is the way it is, anyone else is just wrong". That is not constructive. Edited June 27, 2018 by Waemoth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killuridols Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 4 minutes ago, Waemoth said: Pirmarily that you seem to be so sure about being right that you refuse to try to understand the opinions of other, and instead take to ridiculing their positions. Additionally, I feel that you're not arguing as much as saying "this is the way it is, anyone else is just wrong". That is not constructive. I never said I was right. I explained myself several times, in the first pages of this thread mostly, what I stand for and always made sure that I am just giving my opinion, speaking from my point of view, from my personal values, experience, etc. Im sorry if you feel none of it is constructive... but you're not being constructive either attacking me personally. I have already responded to you before. I will not change my mind on the subject, neither will you. If you are frustated about me, just put me on ignore and save yourself some pain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waemoth Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 15 minutes ago, killuridols said: I never said I was right. I explained myself several times, in the first pages of this thread mostly, what I stand for and always made sure that I am just giving my opinion, speaking from my point of view, from my personal values, experience, etc. Im sorry if you feel none of it is constructive... but you're not being constructive either attacking me personally. I have already responded to you before. I will not change my mind on the subject, neither will you. If you are frustated about me, just put me on ignore and save yourself some pain. You definitely have some good points, and I do not entirely disagree with you. The people saying that the poster is anti-rape are wrong, and Axl is a douche for selecting that painting as cover. If we had no common ground, I would not try to argue with you, as that would be a waste of time. Sorry if I came across as rude, I can be too blunt sometimes. I would never ignore someone based on that I disagree with what they're saying, because that would prevent me from ever understanding them. I am here because I'm interested in what others have to say. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killuridols Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 9 minutes ago, Waemoth said: You definitely have some good points, and I do not entirely disagree with you. The people saying that the poster is anti-rape are wrong, and Axl is a douche for selecting that painting as cover. If we had no common ground, I would not try to argue with you, as that would be a waste of time. Sorry if I came across as rude, I can be too blunt sometimes. I would never ignore someone based on that I disagree with what they're saying, because that would prevent me from ever understanding them. I am here because I'm interested in what others have to say. Thank you. At this point I am lost what the arguement is about anymore. I guess I am just tired of repeating myself and going 'round in circles. If you want me to clarify something specific, I will... or you could send me a PM. My energy is kind of low today. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viruzzz Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 4 hours ago, wasted said: Also you have remember that CD artwork would offend some people. We probably just think whatever. You have to somewhat understand to be offended. 2010s are the "im offended behind a computer" years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussTCB Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 8 minutes ago, viruzzz said: 2010s are the "im offended behind a computer" years. This is my favorite thing I've seen on the internet in a little while: 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soon Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 (edited) So true, why are people crying because others are dissecting a piece of art? Edited June 27, 2018 by soon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killuridols Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 But who are offended by skeleton porn? All of it is cringe, like most of GN'R imagery. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 6 hours ago, appetite4illusions said: Isn't it hilariously ironic that the "Stoned in LA" shirt was used to promote the Rolling Stones gigs and those were the shows that Axl chose to publicly dismiss his band-mates for being junkies? Hello! Who is our merchandiser! You meam Axl was the merch designer? I think that outburst came out of fear that someone would die. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 6 hours ago, killuridols said: Who has an agenda? Some people so focused on an issue they don’t see the context or elements. So they throw the dishes out with the dish water. There’s an exploitation issue and the what goes aroumd comes around meanimg. Some would just dismiss it because it’s a graphic novel style or robots can’t walk. I’m saying beware of exploitative elements but don’t censure things because that can shut down the wider debate. Ultimately this says there are consequences for actions. Even if you’re a robot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killuridols Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, wasted said: Some people so focused on an issue they don’t see the context or elements. So they throw the dishes out with the dish water. There’s an exploitation issue and the what goes aroumd comes around meanimg. Some would just dismiss it because it’s a graphic novel style or robots can’t walk. I’m saying beware of exploitative elements but don’t censure things because that can shut down the wider debate. Ultimately this says there are consequences for actions. Even if you’re a robot. The bolded is your interpretation of it. It is fair and valid. But if someone else doesn't see it that way, I don't think it is because they have an agenda. I guess that, as humans, we will mostly feel more compassion for the assaulted girl than for the a rapist robot or for the avenger monster. Maybe it is futuristic and this is how our reality is going to look, once the AI becomes fully independent of us Edited June 27, 2018 by killuridols Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.