Respect

Keep talking.

Moderators: Morphic, Blue Angel, The Fallen Ones

User avatar
Bau
Nephilim
Posts: 2225
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:55 pm

Post by Bau » Thu Jan 22, 2009 7:30 am

why do you say it is religious?

I didn't mean any of those fancy notions, I just simply ment to ask - are you aware that you exist? never mind in what way shape or form, or by what definition.
User avatar
squishy
Nephilim
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:26 pm

Post by squishy » Thu Jan 22, 2009 7:36 am

The point is, when you start asking questions like that, it's already got religious. If you asked "are you feeling alive", I would answer straightaway; but, I wonder, wouldn't that be religious as well?
remember what the doorknob said
User avatar
Bau
Nephilim
Posts: 2225
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:55 pm

Post by Bau » Thu Jan 22, 2009 9:32 pm

squishy wrote:The point is, when you start asking questions like that, it's already got religious. If you asked "are you feeling alive", I would answer straightaway; but, I wonder, wouldn't that be religious as well?
it is?? I'm sorry I don't understand :( :( :(
gingerpazuzu
Nephilim
Posts: 3278
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 10:00 pm

Post by gingerpazuzu » Tue Jan 27, 2009 2:14 am

:lol: :lol: :lol: *notworthy* *notworthy* well put + to the point
User avatar
squishy
Nephilim
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:26 pm

Post by squishy » Tue Jan 27, 2009 6:45 am

Marduk wrote:Its not religious; inner beings are mysterious.
No sacrificing, no salutes, no-one else.

No Rules, nobady to tell what to.
Oh, but religion doesn't have to be like that. In fact, since it's a purely arbitrary umbrella term for an infinite amount of things, practices, beliefs, systems, etc etc etc, it can mean more or less anything . . .

However, I was refering to its possible Latin roots, to tie or to re-tie, to reconnect or reestablish; to relate or to restore relation and the possibility to relate; that's why I thought "living" could be seen as necessarily religious, or religion as meaningless when not in relation to "living", the two terms inscribed within each other - I'd see "life" as a relation, or a process of relations and relating, and co-dependence more than anything else (btw, "living" as I use it has got nothing to with Vatican's "civilization of life", of course ;))
remember what the doorknob said
User avatar
squishy
Nephilim
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:26 pm

Post by squishy » Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:35 am

Marduk wrote:Yes squishy, you are right, if you tie being yourself out of
ourself; allways you are out; tied. Re-ligion.
Uni-verse. Other hand, never understood, my own bubble;
never really communicate.
I'm not sure if I understand you. But if what I believe you're saying is what you believe you're saying, not only do I very, very much agree, but perhaps we, out-we-ing ourselves - and each other - of ourselves for a split second, just have demonstrated what I saw as religion . . .

It's good to blow bubbles and as at least as good to burst them.
remember what the doorknob said
User avatar
Lord Mureth
Nephilim
Posts: 2726
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 11:02 pm
Contact:

Post by Lord Mureth » Sun Feb 01, 2009 7:48 pm

Back to the original point of this thread. I've said a few things on here in the past without thinking (I'm sure we all have)... but when you meet the family of the person you've said these things about, you suddenly begin to realise that you're talking about a fellow human being... and begin to feel rather bad about past stupidity. It's taught me a lesson, anyhoo. :?
User avatar
Bau
Nephilim
Posts: 2225
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:55 pm

Post by Bau » Sun Feb 01, 2009 9:27 pm

that comendable that you are open about something like that, a lot of people are too egotistical for such personal insite and reflection.

I think that is true for most people that its easier to be more negative toward someone/something when your not familiar with them/it.


I am warped in that I tend to be the other way - curious or optomistic with what I am not familiar and as I become familiar I become much more negative and critical.

Mabee it because the closer I am the more I care. I'm especialy that way with people. I think mabee it gives the impression that my intention is to be unkind when it is the opposite. :oops: Either that or I tend to criticise very insecure and sensitive people :( mabee I just like picking on everything :twisted:

but realy I guess it depends on the situation if there is something to be critical about.
User avatar
Lord Mureth
Nephilim
Posts: 2726
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 11:02 pm
Contact:

Post by Lord Mureth » Mon Feb 02, 2009 1:45 pm

It's not so much a lack of ego on my part, (I'm weird in that I'm a 50/50 mix of fairly low self esteem and massive ego! :? :lol:)... it's more of a conscience thing. I guess I was guilty of slagging off the person, rather than their art; which is against my own rules.

Still don't like the art though :wink: But that's just my subjective taste, innit; and is not a reflection on the person.
User avatar
Bau
Nephilim
Posts: 2225
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:55 pm

Post by Bau » Mon Feb 02, 2009 4:55 pm

you make a good point , its one thing to slag a persons art another the person themselves. Except mabee if they deserve it.

A persons art generally reflects the person, and if one were to find someones art offensive I guess it would stand to reason you would feel negative toward the person as well for creating it. But again its all a matter of context I suppose.

Thats why I don't think its unreasonable for people to want to know more about an artist if your interested in their work or why they created it. For instance I realy wouldn't want to buy or support the art of someone who has something unsavory about them. On the other side, if I found some artwork questionable I might want to know why they created and what they realy meant to say by it.

as far as my ego comment , it just seems like there are so many people that find great pain in admitting they could be wrong about anything. Call me jaded.
User avatar
squishy
Nephilim
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:26 pm

Post by squishy » Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Bau wrote:A persons art generally reflects the person
I wouldn't say so. Or rather I think that the reflection thing yo're referring to is only a part of the many-faceted "truth" here - and a suppositional part, of course.

I'd say that the two - life and art - may be somehow related, one co-creating the other, but in an infinite number of ways. There's been artistic movements and individual artists who said that art is always in distinct opposition to life; there's been those who said thet they're one and the same; and there's been an endless train of intermediary possibilities, too. Why should I say one of these approaches is in general better than others? How does the fact that Saint-John Perse was a high rank diplomat relate to his visionary poetry? Wallace Stevens worked all his life in insurance; how to relate such a fact to his poems - whether those of his "dandy phase", or the later, humanly austere ones?

It is very much relevant, I guess, that so many artists resort to noms de plume, and try to kill once and for all all those biographical quests whose landscape is their art.

And then there's the obvious question about life - whose stories will you believe, in other words, and why? A delicate matter, too. Was Eliot really that Jew-hating, right-wing misogynist obssessed with the idea of High Monoculture, or was he a heroic figure trying to break free from the tyranny he himself had earlier legitimized?
remember what the doorknob said
User avatar
Bau
Nephilim
Posts: 2225
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:55 pm

Post by Bau » Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:50 pm

well thats why I used terms like 'generally' and 'in context' because though someone might create art about something horrible, it doesn't mean they are supporting it , it is usually the opposite. But it is still an expression of how they see something. I guess why to me it is not unreasonable to want to know an artist reason or interpretation of their own art.
User avatar
squishy
Nephilim
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:26 pm

Post by squishy » Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Bau wrote:well thats why I used terms like 'generally' and 'in context' because though someone might create art about something horrible, it doesn't mean they are supporting it , it is usually the opposite. But it is still an expression of how they see something. I guess why to me it is not unreasonable to want to know an artist reason or interpretation of their own art.
Understood :)
remember what the doorknob said
User avatar
ThomasB
Nephilim
Posts: 2654
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 6:07 pm

Post by ThomasB » Mon Feb 02, 2009 10:56 pm

[quote="Bau"]you make a good point , its one thing to slag a persons art another the person themselves. Except mabee if they deserve it. [quote="Bau"]

Though, unfortunately, this class composed in 90% of parasites known as "critics" don't see the difference…

[quote="Bau"]A persons art generally reflects the person, and if one were to find someones art offensive I guess it would stand to reason you would feel negative toward the person as well for creating it. But again its all a matter of context I suppose. [quote="Bau"]

On this one, never underetimate the power of conformity. That states that "those artist types are not like you an I normal folks". If necessary, try to look for any flaws that might justify this assumption, which has been hammered mostly by movies (think "The Doors", for instance) promoting mediocrity.
And no, I don't mean that artists are beyond mediocrity in their daily life. Even Shakespeare had to use the fcuking toilet like the rest of us. I'm talking bout perception.
Reminds me of a wine-fuelled dinner with four mates, all published writers, two f them having gotten literary prizes. One might though we went high on meaningful literary discussion when we wholeheartedly talked bollocks the whole evening ! :)

[quote="Bau"]Thats why I don't think its unreasonable for people to want to know more about an artist if your interested in their work or why they created it. For instance I realy wouldn't want to buy or support the art of someone who has something unsavory about them. On the other side, if I found some artwork questionable I might want to know why they created and what they realy meant to say by it.[quote="Bau"]

Yes, that's where I draw the line. An artist does not have to reveal more than he wants, but sometimes, if they give you the clues, it can be fascinating. When one of my favourite writers and mate at the time finally opened up in an interview, tired of wild assumptions, and it gave me great insight in some of his themes. Namely, I guess I'll never forget the evening Brit writer (and all over great person I point out, one of those real gentlemen that gives Britishness a good name) Stephen Laws explained me why he wrote some parts on his novel and what it meant for him. Fascinating !
Oh, and I agree with your last comment. When painting "Guernica", did Goya endorsed slaughter ? Fcuk no. I remember the numerous controversies around the music we like, from :wumpscut: to London After Midnight, having to justify themselves… Obviously, in our age of increasing conformity demand, everything has to be upfront without anything underlying.

[quote="Bau"]as far as my ego comment , it just seems like there are so many people that find great pain in admitting they could be wrong about anything. Call me jaded.[quote]

As you can guess, it's beyond me… I like standing duly corrected because it meant I've learned something. I don't know if admitting being wrong is a strength or a weakness (and frankly, I don't give a fcuk), but it's still better than the popular game of putting the blame on someone else, anyone…
Fundraiser. You know, it's like Hellraiser, but without the Cenobites, the blood and all that.
IN NOMINE NEMO !
User avatar
Lord Mureth
Nephilim
Posts: 2726
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 11:02 pm
Contact:

Post by Lord Mureth » Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:27 pm

Gosh.... :shock:

... and all cos I didn't like the way somebody sang.... :?
User avatar
Bau
Nephilim
Posts: 2225
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:55 pm

Post by Bau » Tue Feb 03, 2009 2:17 am

Lord Mureth wrote:Gosh.... :shock:

... and all cos I didn't like the way somebody sang.... :?
you controversial trouble maker you :wink:
User avatar
Bau
Nephilim
Posts: 2225
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:55 pm

Post by Bau » Tue Feb 03, 2009 2:27 am

Marduk wrote:Some people try to dare more; often they are called artists.
To get to inside skin of sadist, never says they want it.
But, like method actors; it´s part of usual regocnition.

To get inside normal global warming/financial meltdown.
get a point of view. Every communication/relationship can
be stated as concentration camp.

Be a prisoner, citizen or guard, officer; there have to be
a dealer. Fenceguards in Auswitz are said to be most humans.
Saw and did the inevitable; served both paths.

Self-hate and despair for sins of past? Or try remind everybody
and hope they dont have learned feelings?
Fence is mostly in beliefs.

yeah right,

Some people try to dare more; often they are called artists.

I like this line *notworthy*

but I'm afraid I didn't quite understand the rest of your post...

though it reminds me of a poem I just read recently about personal walls and prisons....
which of course come in different types.

is this what you were refering to?

fences like these are mostly in ones beliefs? That may be true. Question is , are the beliefs wrong? again it may depend on the context.
User avatar
wild bill buttock
Nephilim
Posts: 2571
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:00 pm
Contact:

Post by wild bill buttock » Tue Feb 03, 2009 4:31 pm

Oh here we go again, more bleeding heart "artists". :roll:
If an "Artist" chooses to put his "art" into the public domain he/she has to expect more people not to like it than will actually like it, and no matter how many times the artist or whoever tells them to like it because of *Insert reason*, chances are they still won't like it.
Likewise when an artist becomes a professional, their job is to entertain. They become product exactly the same as a tin of beans. If you add a lump of dog shit to your recipe for beans , no one is gonna buy them are they? (apart from maybe some Germans).
User avatar
squishy
Nephilim
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:26 pm

Post by squishy » Tue Feb 03, 2009 4:38 pm

wild bill buttock wrote:Oh here we go again, more bleeding heart "artists". :roll:
If an "Artist" chooses to put his "art" into the public domain he/she has to expect more people not to like it than will actually like it, and no matter how many times the artist or whoever tells them to like it because of *Insert reason*, chances are they still won't like it.
Here I agree wholeheartedly
wild bill buttock wrote:Likewise when an artist becomes a professional, their job is to entertain. They become product exactly the same as a tin of beans. If you add a lump of dog shit to your recipe for beans , no one is gonna buy them are they? (apart from maybe some Germans).
And here I think you're talking perfect bollocks

Btw, I don't think that artists are any kind of an elite, that they're chosen or cursed, that they are more sensitive or less sensible than anyone else, or in any substantial way different from a regular joe.
remember what the doorknob said
User avatar
wild bill buttock
Nephilim
Posts: 2571
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:00 pm
Contact:

Post by wild bill buttock » Tue Feb 03, 2009 4:53 pm

squishy wrote:
wild bill buttock wrote:Likewise when an artist becomes a professional, their job is to entertain. They become product exactly the same as a tin of beans. If you add a lump of dog shit to your recipe for beans , no one is gonna buy them are they? (apart from maybe some Germans).
And here I think you're talking perfect bollocks

Btw, I don't think that artists are any kind of an elite, that they're chosen or cursed, that they are more sensitive or less sensible than anyone else, or in any substantial way different from a regular joe.
If as an ordinary Joe, you were to do your job poorly or in a way that no-one wanted to buy that which you are selling, then you'd soon starve I'm afraid, and it's no good blame-ing it on the consumer for being wrong.
Don't get me wrong without the maverick artists we'd be cursed with the terminally mundane but unfortunately society in general doesn't see it that way, they want something safe and will only join the revolution after the victory is won. Apathy is the greatest ally of capatalism.
Post Reply