Dubstepforum.com

this thread is basically a "Who has the bigger E-Penis Thread, Let me argue til im blue in the face"

The terrorists won

VirtualMark wrote:This piece of modern art especially stands out to me. The message the artist is trying to convey is very clear - "I AM A TALENTLESS MORON"





Now as for this masterpiece, i definitely see what the artist is trying to say. "I CAN'T PAINT FOR SHIT"




Now this one really takes the piss:






Now i'm not saying all modern art is crap. Just some of the lamer, no effort types. Such pieces that can be easily reproduced by anyone with modest photoshop skills. And call me a skeptic or a hater, but i'm pretty certain that the above pieces won't stand the test of time and be recognized as masterpieces by our future generations. They will probably be forgotten, unlike some of the old masterpieces we treasure now.

Malevich painted a black square around 1917 and it's still widely known

LumiNiscent wrote:Malevich painted a black square around 1917 and it's still widely known

He wrote a book called "The Non-Objective World" that goes into his inspiration for that picture among other things. Real interesting stuff.

I'm going to go take a minute and 30 seconds long diarrhea shit and record it, I'll call it Crapstep and I guess it will be considered music.

Been done already. I'm sure that there's some room for more artists in the shit step AKA brown noise scene though werewolf. Gonna have to change your name if you decide to hop on the bandwagon tho bro, "WereWolf" sounds like Twilight emo boy business.

So do you agree my diahrrea shit is music?

Dunnow mate, haven't heard it yet.

You can't really apply objective criteria to subjective media.

/endthread

What? Isn't Twilight about vampires?

And I think I posted a pretty valid point; if you consider this Noise music, why can't ANY sound be music?
I don't understand why you got personally offended by what I said and try to attack me..

I wouldn't wanna attack you man, you're a werewolf, I'd get torn to shreds.

WereWolf wrote: And I think I posted a pretty valid point; if you consider this Noise music, why can't ANY sound be music?

These are concepts that have been around since at least the '40's or '50's, maybe earlier. You probably have never heard of John Cage or Edgard Varese.

mks wrote:

WereWolf wrote: And I think I posted a pretty valid point; if you consider this Noise music, why can't ANY sound be music?

These are concepts that have been around since at least the '40's or '50's, maybe earlier. You probably have never heard of John Cage or Edgard Varese.

Bruce Haack even.

mks wrote:

WereWolf wrote: And I think I posted a pretty valid point; if you consider this Noise music, why can't ANY sound be music?

These are concepts that have been around since at least the '40's or '50's, maybe earlier. You probably have never heard of John Cage or Edgard Varese.

But just because it's been around for 6 years, how does that change anything?

*60

WereWolf wrote:

mks wrote:

WereWolf wrote: And I think I posted a pretty valid point; if you consider this Noise music, why can't ANY sound be music?

These are concepts that have been around since at least the '40's or '50's, maybe earlier. You probably have never heard of John Cage or Edgard Varese.

But just because it's been around for 6 years, how does that change anything?

You asked the question "Why can't any sound be music?". It can and it's an idea that is not so new.

Change what? Your opinion?

VirtualMark wrote:

accordionfan wrote:lol@ all the "talent" and "skill" fetishists. go listen to some progressive metal wank why doncha.

edit: its cool if you dont like noise (of course) but constantly saying its worthless because you dont need to know "music" to make or because it doesnt require tradtional musical skill is just silly people. come on

Literally, what the fuck? I don't even understand you. So its either love screeching noises or progressive metal wank? I see.

one or the other. choose or perish

VirtualMark wrote:This piece of modern art especially stands out to me. The message the artist is trying to convey is very clear - "I AM A TALENTLESS MORON"





Now as for this masterpiece, i definitely see what the artist is trying to say. "I CAN'T PAINT FOR SHIT"




Now this one really takes the piss:






Now i'm not saying all modern art is crap. Just some of the lamer, no effort types. Such pieces that can be easily reproduced by anyone with modest photoshop skills. And call me a skeptic or a hater, but i'm pretty certain that the above pieces won't stand the test of time and be recognized as masterpieces by our future generations. They will probably be forgotten, unlike some of the old masterpieces we treasure now.

The world needs people to question the validity of art. If it didn't there would be a lot more garbage like this in the world. And I would bet money that the expression they say they are trying to convey with this "art" was something that they came up with to excuse the fact that they really didn't do anything at all. I can paint some lines on a piece of paper and then make up a bullshit expression story as well. That doesn't make me an artist, it just makes me full of shit.

JBE wrote: The world needs people to question the validity of art. If it didn't there would be a lot more garbage like this in the world. And I would bet money that the expression they say they are trying to convey with this "art" was something that they came up with to excuse the fact that they really didn't do anything at all. I can paint some lines on a piece of paper and then make up a bullshit expression story as well. That doesn't make me an artist, it just makes me full of shit.

I agree that questioning the validity of art is necessary, but in doing so the validity of that questioning is also open to scrutiny. A big mistake the "critics" are making in this thread is confusing technical skill with creativity and assuming technical ability is a prerequisite for something being defined as art (it's not even a prerequisite for something to be GOOD art).

Two things, though:

1. What you said above isn't really how things work. Like any other medium, art has communities with lots of people involved. If you make something subpar with no meaning and invent a halfassed meaning, it's going to come off as halfassed. Artists have to present and talk about their work all the time, so just saying one line about it and fucking off isn't going to cut it.

2. That does make you an artist, just a shitty one (unless of course there's a deeper meaning to the whole exercise).

cloak and dagger wrote:

JBE wrote: 1. What you said above isn't really how things work. Like any other medium, art has communities with lots of people involved. If you make something subpar with no meaning and invent a halfassed meaning, it's going to come off as halfassed. Artists have to present and talk about their work all the time, so just saying one line about it and fucking off isn't going to cut it.

2. That does make you an artist, just a shitty one (unless of course there's a deeper meaning to the whole exercise).

So are you saying that the story or meaning behind the art is more important than the "art" itself? Or that the meaning is what actually turns a turd on my lawn from just a turd to a work of art? It might look like a turd to you, but if I can lecture you on how it is representative of my life experiences it's now considered a work of art?

I've only read over the stuff in this thread and I find it pretty interesting. I find the noise they're making to be pretty annoying and pointless, as are some of those pictures VirtualMark posted. However that's just my opinion, and if these things are somehow their means of expression than who am I to say it's not art. As much as i'd love to do just that

VirtualMark wrote:Such pieces that can be easily reproduced by anyone with modest photoshop skills.

There really is no hope for you in this discussion.