I was actually on /pol/ when this shit got started. I was laughing because it was so outrageous and obviously a troll that it reached the level of high art. Then I thought, "Y'know, these people are fucking retards and I'll bet someone actually believes this is real."

Yeah...

I got recommended to read Atlas Shrugged by a friend of mine. That friend turned out to be a beret-wearing high-art-snob ponce, but i didn't know it at the time.

I managed to finish it and whilst there were reasonable ideas in there that i think in some way we have paralleled in reality - whilst i find that most of her characters are sociopathic to some degree, i can very much sympathise with the idea of being led by the least capable in society who abuse the system of power that they shape and build to implement bad ideas badly.

I like the idea that the world would grind to a halt if the morons in charge did not have the ordinary, hard working people to keep things afloat... but that's about all i like about it. And i think we genuinely can see it happening in the world today in a less exaggerated fashion - the recent recession clearly demonstrated that the people in charge of money and property do not understand what they're doing and ignored the warning signs for years. Furthermore, our feckless leaders have done nothing about it, property bubbles continue to grow and bonuses for the upper echelons are still outlandish whilst the lower workers are struggling to get by in the recession. And then the expenses scandal of the MPs in Britain literally stealing money from the public pocket to have their moats cleaned (that actually happened) and such. Yesterday the watchdog looking into the scandal has decided that the investigation will take place in secret from the public and punishments will also be kept secret. Et voila, two clear instances of those in charge having no clue and no moral compass swept under the rug and forgotten about.

In conclusion, Ayn Rand is a very small minded individual who thinks that everyone in the world must think like she does. That is the only reason i can think of for the approximately 30 pages i read about the female lead character's personal sexual obsession with being taken aggressively by a man and made to feel defiled and used, and how all women feel that and all men wish to dominate and use a woman in turn.

But i think she got it spot on about how being led by those least capable morons will bring the world to its knees, and it won't require the hard workers to quit either. It just requires them to let it happen. And there's no little paradise to run off to, there's just Earth.

@artician - that's exactly it. The characters have no human empathy in Atlas Shrugged. I don't understand why it has to be all or nothing for most people - all conservative or all liberal. Why not the best of both? It IS possible to be ethical, productive and innovative at the same time.

Yo fellow traveler: The Andechs Monestary looks pretty cool-Maybe check out the Benedictine-scene and have yer pint or two there? High art, cool haircuts, giant pretzels, dudes all workin' together inna ancient, holy brewery??

Superfecta, eh?!

Cabaret is still and will always be, high art in her truest form!

It's not high art. She's certifiably insane and so ego ridden that she believes this sophomoric pap is brilliant.

I wonder what her point is, assuming there is a point. Is this just absurdism? Commentary on fame, celebrity, music, pop music? Is she mocking high art society? Is it a John Cage 'art is what you put your frame around' kind of thing? Is she purposely provoking the audience? Daring them to laugh? Are these supposed to be gutrural sounds of raw humanity? Does she hate the song or Katy Perry? Too much booze? I never really get where she is coming from.

>> ^chingalera:

Personally.....I believe they should pay the woman some royalties-
Go and watch Orson Welle's,"F for Fake" then revisit this so-called-and-so-claimed travesty of restoration and decide the intrinsic value of the woman's act.
What she did was inadvertent high-art on par with other great "masters" which to the untrained eye (or trained for that matter) are obvious brush-cleanings or Gesso-jobs.
This woman's act is for me a statement of the reality of just how full of themselves "experts" have become.
Simple fact for me is, is that the fresco has been reborn in this dynamic soup unfolding called the human experience and granny's attitude about the whole thing is not only hilarious but utterly commendable!!


Well said!

Personally.....I believe they should pay the woman some royalties-

Go and watch Orson Welle's,"F for Fake" then revisit this so-called-and-so-claimed travesty of restoration and decide the intrinsic value of the woman's act.

What she did was inadvertent high-art on par with other great "masters" which to the untrained eye (or trained for that matter) are obvious brush-cleanings or Gesso-jobs.

This woman's act is for me a statement of the reality of just how full of themselves "experts" have become.
Simple fact for me is, is that the fresco has been reborn in this dynamic soup unfolding called the human experience and granny's attitude about the whole thing is not only hilarious but utterly commendable!!

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

I disagree. QT knows exactly what he is doing. Some of his films are dialog driven (Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown) and some are genre and/or action driven films (True Romance, Kill Bill, Inglorious Basterds). I have no doubt he is capable of writing another Pulp, and that one day he probably will, but for now he is doing high-art pastiche of the classic exploitation dramas he grew up with. This is not to say that these action films are less good than his dialog films, they just have different aesthetic criteria.
He is much like Speilberg in this way, if polar opposites in dialog and style. Speilberg has his serious movies, and he has his homages to the serial action films of his youth.
Prediction: Eventually Quentin will eventually get his fill of action films and create another magnum opus, and likely get himself an Oscar in the process. I would absolutely love for him to take his favorite film of recent times, Battle Royale, and make an American-culture-specific version - not a remake of the film, but a remake of the concept as it would occur if it played out with American high schoolers.
Also, comparing QT to Shayamalan is blasphemy. Even Shayamalan's best work was an average film with a great twist. Shayamalan has never shown even an ounce of the writing or directing skills that QT has. Take it back. TAKE IT BACK!!1!>> ^lucky760:
Win.
I no longer have any confidence Quentin will make another Reservoir Dogs- or Pulp Fiction-caliber film, and I've made my peace with that, but I will still eagerly await every one of his new projects with fervent anticipation.
(I just hope he never descends as far down as M. Night Shyamalan.)



I think even he knows he's lost something. Politely disagree, sir. *tip hat*

I disagree. QT knows exactly what he is doing. Some of his films are dialog driven (Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown) and some are genre and/or action driven films (True Romance, Kill Bill, Inglorious Basterds). I have no doubt he is capable of writing another Pulp, and that one day he probably will, but for now he is doing high-art pastiche of the classic exploitation dramas he grew up with. This is not to say that these action films are less good than his dialog films, they just have different aesthetic criteria.

He is much like Speilberg in this way, if polar opposites in dialog and style. Speilberg has his serious movies, and he has his homages to the serial action films of his youth.

Prediction: Eventually Quentin will eventually get his fill of action films and create another magnum opus, and likely get himself an Oscar in the process. I would absolutely love for him to take his favorite film of recent times, Battle Royale, and make an American-culture-specific version - not a remake of the film, but a remake of the concept as it would occur if it played out with American high schoolers.

Also, comparing QT to Shayamalan is blasphemy. Even Shayamalan's best work was an average film with a great twist. Shayamalan has never shown even an ounce of the writing or directing skills that QT has. Take it back. TAKE IT BACK!!1!>> ^lucky760:

Win.
I no longer have any confidence Quentin will make another Reservoir Dogs- or Pulp Fiction-caliber film, and I've made my peace with that, but I will still eagerly await every one of his new projects with fervent anticipation.
(I just hope he never descends as far down as M. Night Shyamalan.)

*promote high art.

I'm surprised this didn't go higher. These folks always do such a great job. They don't just autotune, they create autotune high art!

I posted this video purely for it's wtf factor. Somehow, this has ignited a serious conversation as to what and what does not constitute true art, and has called her artistic integrity and true motivations into question. Although I wouldn't classify this as 'high art', who the fuck am I to say that it is completely devoid of artistic merit? This seems to be more along the lines of conceptual performance art, and I highly doubt that she billed this as 'great theatre'...I enter into videos, such as this, with experiential prejudices and preconceived notions of the 'pretentious hipster artist', and I judge her and her type quite harshly, dismissing her work as an infantile attempt to induce shock value. If I knew that she was some kind of Julliard alumni who was touted as 'the future of dance', I wonder how that might affect my rating this video on a scale of 'artistic merit'. At least this production has balls and doesn't pander to the accepted norm. I would love to hear the average sifters critical analysis of a Picasso(for instance). We all know that he's considered to be a master, but why? Could you explain it without rehashing what you learned in Art History or what you've read on Wikipedia? Art fascism is an ugly thing. In the end it boils down to personal opinion....

This whole "games can't be art" thing is silly. From Wikipedia:

"Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging symbolic elements in a way that influences and affects the senses, emotions, and/or intellect."

Simple, all games can be considered art. Maybe not high art all the time but art none-the-less. I suppose we'd have to know how Ebert defines art and then punch him in the nose for being an idiot.

>> ^BoneRemake:

"to me end result looked a bit naff.
I mean bit of an arse to make but seems a bit tacky I guess you are just gona eat it and its for a buffet table its not really meant to be high art.
this is like the food equivalent of them space spray painted images. only at least this is edible. "
as seen on http://videosift.com/video/Watermelon-carving
Seems westy is of the high art society calibre.


well thing is the news is drawing atention to this guy but ignoring thousends of other people with just as valid artistic talent or ablity but are maby operating within a more traditoinal way ,

allso i wouldnt have anny issue with what this guy is doing it just seems to me its lacking emgination , if u going to draw on dusty car windows im sure with a bit of thought he can think of some way to use the dust or the car that realy makes something specail with the images. as it is what he is doing is not that difrent from scraping one of them charcholl images , and he is not doing a very good job of it considering he is just coppying a photo.