WE'RE DOOMED! Art and Idiocracy on the Titanic

[Zen]

Posts in the on "off Topic" section of the forum sometimes go, well, off topic. Perhaps losing some valuable and insightful ideas when they are curtailed.

- CMoon's popular "Movies you've just watched" thread,
- BryanM's freeforall battle royal thread of ever changing title,
- Skykid's "Little things that annoy the hell out of you" thread.

Different opinions can devolve into heated argument, simply because of contextual and semantic confusion.
Many times we perhaps miss the forest for the trees. On politics and government, we focus on our differences rather than the nature of politics and government itself.
Missing the reality that we are all on the reservation. "You can check-in any time you want but you can never leave". Are fewer and fewer people recognising this?

So much for the idiocracy part of the title. On to "art".

The "art" issue, insofar as it is a "problem" in the various threads, can range from a lack of, or lack of desire to, appreciate refinement of effort and outcome, to a refutation of the very concept of "art" itself,
to sometimes just wanting to nod ones head to a catchy tune or smile at a particularly nice explosion onscreen. Is there even a "problem", or are we doomed?

Would it be useful to have a thread where one can discuss ideas outside the "reservation"? One where we can expand on the "why" re. the value of a thing when it comes to what is called "artistic merit"?
Or, last but by no means least, where we can just pop in to proclaim that as a species "WE'RE DOOMED!", short of divine/alien/pharmaceutical/ intervention or some fortuitous evolutionary quantum jump.

If you will permit, I will start the ball rolling on the Titanic; Disclaimer; I may or may not believe any of what I say

ART; There is no such beast.

IDIOCRACY; Everything in existence is "food" for something else. "What" are you consuming and "what" is consuming you?

WE'RE DOOMED!; Oh, boy! Absolutely. Were fucked!

[Blinge]

Pretentious claptrap.
=)

[Durandal]

Your posts read like bad light novel translations and every time I do seriously try to understand them I get temporary dyslexia

[cave hermit]

I really do enjoy the Game and Watch gallery series, although I find it a little annoying that the inactive LCD sprites don't show up (I get why they were taken out given they were just a limitation of the original hardware, but it would have been nice to have an optional toggle for the purists).

The game and watch games really are a great example of how to make fun arcade style games with incredibly limited electronics. Sometimes innovation really does come about as a result of limitations.

[BareKnuckleRoo]

The only response I could think of to the initial post was to quote Victor Hugo's letter to his publisher:

?

[BrianC]

I really do enjoy the Game and Watch gallery series, although I find it a little annoying that the inactive LCD sprites don't show up (I get why they were taken out given they were just a limitation of the original hardware, but it would have been nice to have an optional toggle for the purists).

The inactive LCD images do show up on Game and Watch Gallery 4 for GBA (but not on the ereader version of Manhole), the game and watch collections for DS, and the stand alone DSi Game and Watch games.

[Plasmo]

I'm all for closing the off-topic section of the forum. It's by far the worst and most boring.

[austere]

Different opinions can devolve into heated argument, simply because of contextual and semantic confusion.

You've just described the entire internet.

I'm all for closing the off-topic section of the forum. It's by far the worst and most boring.

But how else will I get my daily cringe?

[Sumez]

I'm all for closing the off-topic section of the forum. It's by far the worst and most boring.

But then where will I ever discuss sidescrolling action platforming games?

[Zen]

Different opinions can devolve into heated argument, simply because of contextual and semantic confusion.

You've just described the entire internet.

Indeed. With that in mind, I was suggesting a thread where one would check at the door, ones "feelings", before posting. The antithesis of a safe space, if you will.

CMoon's "Movies you've just watched" thread, occasionally produces some very thoughtful and insightful points but differences in perception and appreciation invariably get lost into off-topic personal attacks.

BryanM's political thread is an insane asylum (I suspect BryanM will take that as a compliment). Purveyors of the finest identity politics go there and vent. Which is absolutely fine.
Would it not be more productive to have less feelings on issues that are nothing more than consumers arguing to the bitter end, on why Coke is morally, philosophical and, goddamnit, tastier than Pepsi, in a rage of Diabetic retinopathy?

Simply put, we are all going nowhere but the ground. Could we at least be honest and productive with our dialectic.

[cave hermit]

I had buffalo wings the other day. They weren't prepared amazingly, but with a little red hot sauce on them we were satisfying enough.

Really, the concept is so simple, yet so genius. Deep fried (yet not breaded) chicken wings in a spicy pepper vinegar sauce, perhaps served with some ranch or blue cheese (not too much a fan of the latter myself, but many will disagree with me).

The one shortcoming of buffalo wings however is that they tend to be incredibly messy to eat, smearing one's hands and face in a film of chicken grease, fryer oil and hot sauce.

The so called "boneless" buffalo "wings" implicitly offer a solution to this inconvenience, but they are buffalo "wings" only in name; they are in fact breaded chunks of chicken breast coated in buffalo sauce, and thus only resemble true buffalo wings on a superficial level.

Missing is the delightfully crisp and melty skin, the even proportion of meat to sauce. Yet if cleanliness is of higher priority, I suppose they could be tolerated in a pinch.

[FinalBaton]

I legit can't figure out what the OP wants us to discuss here...

Is this an inside joke or something?

[Blinge]

He wants a safe space where people can't challenge his racist views

[Xer Xian]

This thread feels like an excerpt from Infinite Jest by D.F.Wallace

[Skykid]

Do you feel that social network commentaries are making incorrect grammar acceptable (ergo, lack of possessive apostrophes) among the population at large?

[mamboFoxtrot]

RegalZen

[Zen]

This thread feels like an excerpt from Infinite Jest by D.F.Wallace

[Zen]

Do you feel that social network commentaries are making incorrect grammar acceptable (ergo, lack of possessive apostrophes) among the population at large?

I feel lack of possessive apostrophes among the population at large to be less of concern than a can of "Merda d'artista" selling in August 2016, at an art auction in Milan,for a new world record of €275,000.
I am more concerned about the manufactured consent of "law" and government and with people kicking the shit out of each other on their master's chessboards.
Finally I am concerned that given the preposterous situation of simian consciousness, driven insane by the knowledge of its own mortality, spends what little time it has in this abattoir, repeatedly kicking each other in the balls.

Just tired of the shit-slinging, man. The megaphoning, the dogpiling, the attempts at shaming. It does not affect me but it certainly "cools" the debates.

[MX7]

Idiocracy seems to be one of those films, like They Live, The Matrix and Fight Club that, despite being being good fun in their own rights (except for Fight Club which is largely a piece of shit), have a particularly digestible ideological conciet that allows a certain audience the gratification of 'seeing through' a particular obfuscation in society. Suddenly we get lots of dreary image macros and appropriated vernacular from the films and a general sense that a Hollywood film has provided a previously unforseen, privileged viewpoint allowed only to a certain few. Cue headache inducing proselytising, consistent misuse of the word 'culture' (check out the last few pages of the Donald Trump thread) and above all, scapegoating nebulously defined group or concept. Examples include religious groups, 'culture', 'society', 'social justice warriors' et al.

Because the ideological threat is derived from a narrative device, and is often ridiculous given these films are often satirical in nature, this invariably leads to people screaming on the internet and then feeling frustrated when absolutely nothing happens. If people cannot see the forest for the trees, it's invariably because they're too hung up on secret symbols in dollar bills and wondering how jet fuel can melt steel beams to notice very tangible attacks on civil liberties and individual autonomy.

Is there a problem with humming along to a catchy tune? Absolutely not, as anything can be negotiated and recontextualised to suit any need, political, intellectual, whatever. While many early Marxist critiques got hung up on this idea of media and therefore discourse as a distraction, as any teenager who's just read The Outsider will tell you, there's not an awful lot of value in ascribing a 'point' to anything really. Though there's a lot of fun and perhaps misguided feelings of self worth in trying. Refinement and effort are interchangeable with passion and eroticism when films like They Live can be coveted simultaneously as both critiques of far left and far right ideological perspectives, completely and perhaps thankfully dismissing the intention of the producer. The sooner we can stop discussing artistic merit and instead the qualitative aspects of something while fundamentally understanding objectivity the better.

I'm not going to criticise your individual beliefs, but caring less about conceptual art and instead concentrating on reading as many and as varied media as possible is a good start.

Frankly I can't put my finger on what it is you want from this thread. Personally I advise taking drugs and watching Dario Argento films.

[Zen]

Spoiler

Idiocracy seems to be one of those films, like They Live, The Matrix and Fight Club that, despite being being good fun in their own rights (except for Fight Club which is largely a piece of shit), have a particularly digestible ideological conciet that allows a certain audience the gratification of 'seeing through' a particular obfuscation in society. Suddenly we get lots of dreary image macros and appropriated vernacular from the films and a general sense that a Hollywood film has provided a previously unforseen, privileged viewpoint allowed only to a certain few. Cue headache inducing proselytising, consistent misuse of the word 'culture' (check out the last few pages of the Donald Trump thread) and above all, scapegoating nebulously defined group or concept. Examples include religious groups, 'culture', 'society', 'social justice warriors' et al.

Because the ideological threat is derived from a narrative device, and is often ridiculous given these films are often satirical in nature, this invariably leads to people screaming on the internet and then feeling frustrated when absolutely nothing happens. If people cannot see the forest for the trees, it's invariably because they're too hung up on secret symbols in dollar bills and wondering how jet fuel can melt steel beams to notice very tangible attacks on civil liberties and individual autonomy.

Is there a problem with humming along to a catchy tune? Absolutely not, as anything can be negotiated and recontextualised to suit any need, political, intellectual, whatever. While many early Marxist critiques got hung up on this idea of media and therefore discourse as a distraction, as any teenager who's just read The Outsider will tell you, there's not an awful lot of value in ascribing a 'point' to anything really. Though there's a lot of fun and perhaps misguided feelings of self worth in trying. Refinement and effort are interchangeable with passion and eroticism when films like They Live can be coveted simultaneously as both critiques of far left and far right ideological perspectives, completely and perhaps thankfully dismissing the intention of the producer. The sooner we can stop discussing artistic merit and instead the qualitative aspects of something while fundamentally understanding objectivity the better.

I'm not going to criticise your individual beliefs, but caring less about conceptual art and instead concentrating on reading as many and as varied media as possible is a good start.

Frankly I can't put my finger on what it is you want from this thread. Personally I advise taking drugs and watching Dario Argento films.

Perhaps you read too much into my reference to "idiocracy".

I follow no scapegoating narrative that I am aware of. I will gladly state that I do not suffer the glazed eyed sedation of the relativists, if that makes things any more clear.

I can not be concerned about "conceptual art", as I do not consent to its "existence". It is the nefarious misuse of language in the birthing of a phantom and its final legitimisation by facetious Semiotics, that concerns me.
I have an "installation" in my bathroom. Its a metaphor for decay and rebirth. I call it the "Perch of the Phoenix". Its is a primordial audio visual experience of; the very movements of life itself. Maybe I should get it appraised?
I, also, am "not going to criticise your individual beliefs, but", may I ask if you have a vested interest, financial/emotional of otherwise in the existence of "art"?

Frankly I can't put my finger on what it is you want from this thread.

Posts like yours, MX7. Thank you.

[Rob]

He wants a safe space where people can't challenge his racist views

All people and all groups are exactly the same, even when it's plainly obvious that that is not the case.

100% hard work, 0% genetics.

[antron]

It's the suggestion that these difference have led to economic/social disparities that you take on faith that we find objectionable. We can't prove it's not. The burden is on you. Despite the lack of proof Zen just believes it. Likely because it fits his worldview of superiority.

Seriously, fast twitch muscles? What else, skin cancer protection, curly hair? These things held Africans back? Spit out what you are really thinking so we can see you for what you are.

[Rob]

It's the suggestion that these difference have led to economic/social disparities that you take on faith that we find objectionable.

The belief that discrimination explains any disparity is what I find objectionable. The difference is that the discrimination theory shapes policy, which then (for instance) punishes Asians for being too successful while underachievers are propped up. The fact is that we are not all built the same and are therefore not all equally capable at everything.

[BryanM]

The belief that discrimination explains any disparity is what I find objectionable.

It isn't discrimination, it's the difference between being a capitalist and being capital.

Mr.Burns can use his wealth to protect his wealth. The poor bastard coal miners aren't able to do jack shit to protect themselves: automation and competition from natural gas has fucked them. Their region of the country has been written off as a so-called "sacrifice zone", the only value these people now have is to take on debt and become chips in the capitalists' casino game.

Your stereotype of the Asian Master Race is particularly kind of weird, as it glosses over the number of illegal immigrants working in some dive, who can't speak english, forced to be their employer's slave out of fear of being caught and deported. Or the poor bastards on those fishing boats who end up as fish chow. (Fish chow makes $0 annual income and holds $0 in net wealth.)

The median household wealth of the bottom half of asian-american households is $18,000. For whites, that number is $42,000. "Doing almost half as good as the guys in the plumbing business!! = MASTER RACE" is..... a joke.

The "wealthy asian" stereotype exists because it's a useful fiction for capitalists and their stalwart allies the racists to peddle. A tiny group of people, 5% of the population, broke as shit as anyone else, but we can use them as the only example of "some of the good ones" because there's so many easier scapegoats (with larger penises, which is what all of this is really about) to distract us with.

[Rob]

A tiny group of people, 5% of the population, broke as shit as anyone else,

18 million only seems tiny because we don't often see them in the news. "Broke as shit as anyone else" - poverty rate by race. Simply not true.

Asian Master Race
"some of the good ones"

Yep, they do a really bad job of being systemically oppressed. Most likely to have a college degree, highest median household income, lowest unemployment rate, etc. Of course not any person from any Asian village in any corner (Cambodia) of the continent is going to thrive in America, but as a very broad group they do pretty well.

[Sumez]

Way to ruin an already perfectly awful thread.

[Rob]

Way to ruin an already perfectly awful thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXrB99LItDc

[BryanM]

I know having $42,000 to my name after a lifetime of work, at that ripe median age of 40, looking ahead to it evaporating in smoke from healthcare and other various rents in my twilight years, is indeed the icon of total supremacy.

It's completely worthwhile to argue who is the king of the cattle. Farmer Burns really loves it when we play in the doo-pile like that.

He still ends up eating his favoritest pig in the end, but his feelings matter.

This concludes this week's episode of Animal Farm. Next time: Haunted houses and cats.

[Square_Air]

Is this thread objectively perfect? Can we get Nietzsche on the phone to verify the qualitative value of a buffalo wing?

The real questions need to be asked.

[Strider77]

Who farted?