I hate how well this works and I hate how it makes me feel even more.
Childish Gambino - This is America
- Dok
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 2225
- Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 10:39 pm
- Location: Ojai
Re: Childish Gambino - This is America
Local milk person
- mackerelmint
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 13674
- Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 9:51 pm
- Location: トイレ国、ウンチ市
Re: Childish Gambino - This is America
You could have clarified that a lot earlier and we'd have had a lot less to say about this.InLimbo wrote: ↑Sat May 12, 2018 7:23 amI don't disagree with any of that, and maybe I should clarify that by saying all art is political, I'm not implying that all art is and only is political. As you state, there is any number of prisms/lenses that art can be explored through (which I've used a few posts back an intent and historical lens) - where these get blended and often contentious is for me the most significant points of interest.
No, I'm not. I'm arguing that being innundated to some political structure by nature, that everything is created within an overall context does not mean that the art itself is inherently political in subject either implicitly or explicitly, or that it necessarily speaks to the context in which it came into being. And that ignoring creator's intent for the sake of defining it in one's own terms is, while fine on a personal level, a projection and only a subjective truth.InLimbo wrote: ↑Sat May 12, 2018 7:23 amThis is essentially my point - mackerelmint here trying to negate the fact that art is innudated to some political structure by nature, and therefore applying a political lens to it can be totally written off by the author just stating, "oh I didn't want this to be political". That's what reduces the scope and complexity of the subject, right?
This is an excellent rectangle
- natthu
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 2740
- Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:30 am
- Location: Adelaide, Australia
Re: Childish Gambino - This is America
Levity?
That is a serious social commentary about the endless recycling of ideas that happens in pop music. Gambino has clearly just rehashed Carl Ray Jepson's smash hit in a new style. Completely derivative.
- mackerelmint
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 13674
- Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 9:51 pm
- Location: トイレ国、ウンチ市
Re: Childish Gambino - This is America
Not at this point, no. I mean, you've put so much effort into not doing it, and I can't MAKE you, so no. But if you can't tell me why my criticism of the logic you used to reach your conclusions is flawed, then how can you claim not to be making a definitive argument?
No, you shouldn't, and that assumes the person in question hasn't already. But for the love of god, what's dishonest about not being interested in anything, for any reason? Who made you the arbiter of what is and isn't valid for other people to feel?InLimbo wrote: ↑Sat May 12, 2018 5:37 amwords words words
However, I shouldn't be the one to tell you that seeing something a computer screen, text book, or TV is considerably different than in person, particularly a painting heavily textured with a size of 9' x 17'. So, yeah I'd hope that a person would be open to going to see one in person. Anyway, this dishonesty thing, again, is not regarding not being interested (insert scroll wheel and back button comment); it is for the reasoning not being interested because of it being political.
Because not all artists make art about politics. I've told you that umpteen different ways already, and even posted a saccharine, utterly tasteless Thomas Kinkade picture that has nothing whatsoever to say about politics. You went and "clarified" that it was never your intent to argue that it would be only political, but all of your arguments can certainly be seen as supporting that thesis. Similarly, one could consider any art made in america, or by an american as an example of "american art", but that doesn't define its subject. That's my point. That and that it's not dishonest to lack interest in a thing for a reason. You could argue it's short sighted, closed minded, or any number of things, but "dishonest" just doesn't fit unless you're trying to pick a fight.
And I'm not interested in art about politics. I'm just not. I am interested in politics, but I like to engage with them via news and facts rather than with punditry or, in the case of art, with abstractions of the opinions of others. How on god's green earth can that be dishonest?
This is an excellent rectangle
- InLimbo
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 1025
- Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 2:47 pm
Re: Childish Gambino - This is America
B-but I have.mackerelmint wrote: ↑Sat May 12, 2018 2:29 pmNot at this point, no. I mean, you've put so much effort into not doing it, and I can't MAKE you, so no. But if you can't tell me why my criticism of the logic you used to reach your conclusions is flawed, then how can you claim not to be making a definitive argument?
mackerelmint wrote: ↑Sat May 12, 2018 2:13 pmNo, I'm not. I'm arguing that being innundated to some political structure by nature, that everything is created within an overall context does not mean that the art itself is inherently political in subject either implicitly or explicitly, or that it necessarily speaks to the context in which it came into being. And that ignoring creator's intent for the sake of defining it in one's own terms is, while fine on a personal level, a projection and only a subjective truth.InLimbo wrote: ↑Sat May 12, 2018 7:23 amThis is essentially my point - mackerelmint here trying to negate the fact that art is innudated to some political structure by nature, and therefore applying a political lens to it can be totally written off by the author just stating, "oh I didn't want this to be political". That's what reduces the scope and complexity of the subject, right?
What?
Oh, I've also addressed that I don't ignore the artist's intent.
That's fair - didn't realize that I had to state "given that the person hasn't seen it before". Jesus.mackerelmint wrote: ↑Sat May 12, 2018 2:29 pmNo, you shouldn't, and that assumes the person in question hasn't already.InLimbo wrote: ↑Sat May 12, 2018 5:37 amHowever, I shouldn't be the one to tell you that seeing something a computer screen, text book, or TV is considerably different than in person, particularly a painting heavily textured with a size of 9' x 17'. So, yeah I'd hope that a person would be open to going to see one in person. Anyway, this dishonesty thing, again, is not regarding not being interested (insert scroll wheel and back button comment); it is for the reasoning not being interested because of it being political.
And I've not claimed to be any arbiter of what people should be interested in. I've addressed this already as well.
Similarly, one could consider any art made in america, or by an american as an example of "american art", but that doesn't define its subject.
No shit, and I demonstrated this by providing an example (warning: autofellatio ahead) of a love poem. I'm starting to think I've wasted my time (joke).
You say you don't like political art - didn't I read where you enjoy The Cosby Show? This is a rhetorical question, take it as you will.
I think I'm going to bail on this discussion - it's getting unreasonably tedious, exhausting, repetitive, and it's going to be nice evening outdoors where I am. I'll let you have the last word.
Last edited by InLimbo on Sat May 12, 2018 3:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Dok
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 2225
- Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 10:39 pm
- Location: Ojai
Re: Childish Gambino - This is America
I agree with InLimbo. Let's let Megan have the last word about a piece of work she still hasn't seen. I'll honestly be disappointed if she actually does watch it - seems like it could erode her credibility.
Local milk person
- mackerelmint
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 13674
- Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 9:51 pm
- Location: トイレ国、ウンチ市
Re: Childish Gambino - This is America
But I haven't, and won't say anything about the content of piece of work I haven't seen, at least until I see it, and beyond the extent of what I know to be there from others who have. To do so WOULD be dishonest.
But, I haven't. And given that it was introduced in the thread as "protest music", then described as being overtly political, both things I'm not interested in experiencing musically in particular and artistically in general, and because I haven't heard a CG song yet that I have enjoyed, I decided, "eh, I'll skip it", which would have been the end of it, but Dok and I seemingly can't resist a chance to butt heads. Also, I don't like shirtless dancing dudes.
"There is an exhibition of red paintings at the museum, it's very interesting."
"But I dislike the color red, so I think I'll not go. I am not interested in seeing red paintings."
"That's a dishonest way of thinking and thing to do. You cannot know that you don't like THESE red paintings until you have seen them. The way you feel is invalid."
"But I can, because they are red, which I do not like. And feelings can't be invalid, they simply are."
"Because red is a primary color, it is in pretty much any example of painting one could possibly point to, to some degree. So all paintings are red paintings, and you saying you don't like the color red is dishonest. Even blue color fields that have the slightest purplish hues at the edges. It may be blue, but it must also be categorized as being red."
"Why?"
"Because that's how I see it. I am open to the possibility of the validity of your point of view, yet at the same time, even if I accept that validity, I cannot accept that you are not being dishonest".
In which case you actually aren't open to the validity of my argument, because of that inherent contradiction. You can either accept the possibility of its validity and accept that when viewed through that lens the "dishonesty" evaporates, or reject it outright and keep calling me dishonest, but you can't have it both ways, no matter how hard you
What I know is that it is a political music video, which while it may be a brilliant example of such, is not a way in which I enjoy engaging with the political, and I have a lifetime of experiential examples that led me long ago to that preference. That's the honest truth. Meanwhile, elsewhere on this very site, "I don't like that band" is considered an acceptable reason not to listen to somebody's new album. Same goes for foods, spectacles, and every other kind of sensory pleasure. Nobody's been able to explain how this is any different, or even tried, or is likely to, because they know it's not. There's a double standard at play here, and it's bullshit.
But, I haven't. And given that it was introduced in the thread as "protest music", then described as being overtly political, both things I'm not interested in experiencing musically in particular and artistically in general, and because I haven't heard a CG song yet that I have enjoyed, I decided, "eh, I'll skip it", which would have been the end of it, but Dok and I seemingly can't resist a chance to butt heads. Also, I don't like shirtless dancing dudes.
"There is an exhibition of red paintings at the museum, it's very interesting."
"But I dislike the color red, so I think I'll not go. I am not interested in seeing red paintings."
"That's a dishonest way of thinking and thing to do. You cannot know that you don't like THESE red paintings until you have seen them. The way you feel is invalid."
"But I can, because they are red, which I do not like. And feelings can't be invalid, they simply are."
"Because red is a primary color, it is in pretty much any example of painting one could possibly point to, to some degree. So all paintings are red paintings, and you saying you don't like the color red is dishonest. Even blue color fields that have the slightest purplish hues at the edges. It may be blue, but it must also be categorized as being red."
"Why?"
"Because that's how I see it. I am open to the possibility of the validity of your point of view, yet at the same time, even if I accept that validity, I cannot accept that you are not being dishonest".
In which case you actually aren't open to the validity of my argument, because of that inherent contradiction. You can either accept the possibility of its validity and accept that when viewed through that lens the "dishonesty" evaporates, or reject it outright and keep calling me dishonest, but you can't have it both ways, no matter how hard you
What I know is that it is a political music video, which while it may be a brilliant example of such, is not a way in which I enjoy engaging with the political, and I have a lifetime of experiential examples that led me long ago to that preference. That's the honest truth. Meanwhile, elsewhere on this very site, "I don't like that band" is considered an acceptable reason not to listen to somebody's new album. Same goes for foods, spectacles, and every other kind of sensory pleasure. Nobody's been able to explain how this is any different, or even tried, or is likely to, because they know it's not. There's a double standard at play here, and it's bullshit.
This is an excellent rectangle
- mackerelmint
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 13674
- Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 9:51 pm
- Location: トイレ国、ウンチ市
Re: Childish Gambino - This is America
I'm sure it'll happen at some point, I'm just not going to put any effort into it. Not even just to spite you, Dok.
This is an excellent rectangle
- BlixaFan
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 2757
- Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 8:37 pm
- Location: Canada
- Contact:
Re: Childish Gambino - This is America
not that i'm really saying anything that hasn't already been said, but i think the video is wicked, and i really like the song too. the way the bass synth kind of snakes along is very cool