Posts by DCBCauchi
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Just for off-topic laughs, towards a definition of art:
An art work is an object, whether real or virtual, whose constituent elements have been intentionally arranged for a non-functional purpose and that is presented in such a way that it refers to other art works.
Discuss.
-
Cracker: Spotted, in reply to BenWilson,
Hell, I never even tried to answer that kind of question as a philosophy student. I can’t see it going anywhere useful, other than perhaps to signal what you’re into, so that like-minded people are attracted.
Yeah, there is an element of like-mindedness, otherwise known as taste. Certain kinds of personalities respond to certain kinds of art. But that doesn’t mean it’s a useless discussion to have.
The best analogy I’ve come across is with law. Law is all made up and subjective (except for mathematical laws (heh heh)). But that doesn’t mean we can’t discuss them sensibly. That’s what court cases are: two people put forward rival cases, and a supposedly reasonable and disinterested person decides who’s made the better case.
Art works and the philosophy of art are like case law and legislation. They provide the framework that the rival cases are presented within and the criteria for deciding which is the better case.
Unfortunately for art, the philosophers and theoreticians have not been doing their job, for quite some time, leading to the parlous state we find ourselves in.
As a result, my friends and I have had to become philosophers of art as well as artists. That’s fine by me. I love talking about that stuff. So do most of my friends.
I just don't want to write about it. I hate the written word.
-
Muse: Indecision '11: Outrageous!, in reply to Steve Barnes,
It's an incentive built into the structure of something.
No explicit deal need be done if you set things up in such a way that the consequences of decisions determine what decisions are made.
'You want to put on a play? Sure, go for it. This theatre here has a cheap rate and free advertising. Those other theatres? People go round saying bad things about them.'
Which theatre do you choose?
-
In my experience (mostly 1988–91) libertarians are silly kids from wealthy families who unthinkingly repeat the self-serving things daddy says at the dinner table. I do not want to speculate on what kind of mental image they have of themselves. Vile.
I reckon they should be more outspoken, not less. In that link, Lew had the right idea with the edits to the comments but letting them stand.
What a bunch of plonkers.
-
Has Stuff just put up a press release without editing it?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/music/5933894/Kanye-axed-from-BDO
‘It was confirmed last week that controversial hip hop group Odd Future had been pulled from the festival after complaints were received about their homophobic lyrics.
’Can you add that refunds on tickets only avaliabel until Novermber 30.
’And that Kanye is still appearing at selected Australian BDOs[.]’
Gee, I’d be overjoyed if I’d forked out for this mess.
-
Muse: The Very Odd Future According to…, in reply to George Darroch,
I heard a snippet of one of the BDO organisers on bFM this morning. She seemed to indicate that they, as promoters and a business have a thing for not booking acts that are down the homophobic, sexist, or racist road. They want to be inclusive and comfortable. At the same time, titillation, controversy, or other such generators of outrage they’re entirely okay with. There’s a line and a balance to perform. Once they realised Odd Future were more than they wanted, they dropped them.
Personally, I have no problem with that whatsoever. But I do think it is beside the point.
As far as I can tell, one person wrote an email, probably hoping for just this reaction (probably because of the Beenie Man history). I have no problem with that either. It is laudable.
What I do have a problem with is the politician who seems to have acted deplorably. It is a bad precedent. A scary precedent. One that encourages self-censorship in publicly funded arts organisations (as if they need any more of that!). And gods know who else.
Regardless of the whys and wherefores, Sandra Coney appears to have done a bad thing. No matter how you slice and dice it.
It is not acceptable.
-
Hard News: On Science, in reply to izogi,
Talk to nearly any scientist who relies on competitive grants and they’ll have stories about frustrations of rarely being able to do what they do best, and instead spending large portions of their time creating applications for funding, having to explain (or make up) likely results before they have any results to “prove” their research is worth funding more than the next person.
I suspect you can replace ‘any scientist’ with ‘anyone’ in that sentence.
-
Um, I thought universities weren’t really about the students but rather the research they produce. Supposedly pure research.
And when I think of mature students, I think of them as at least over 25 and usually over 55. The ones who talk in tutorials when no-one else does. Remember them?
All the polytechnics wanted to be universities, but instead all the universities became polytechnics.
-
The word iconoclast has completely changed its meaning. It originally referred to zealots who roamed the land destroying anything they didn't like.
Cos it is not enough to not go near it themselves. That's not zealotry. Zealots need to ensure that no-one can. Their way of winning arguments is underhanded. They can't compromise. Not one bloody inch. They can't live with different points of view. They won't tolerate it.
Not till we're all singing the same tune. I suspect ants actually have more culture.
Everything changes and everything stays the same. Lots of good material but.
-
Muse: The Very Odd Future According to…, in reply to Joe Wylie,
But they are different songs. The Terminals' is much better.
It has venom.