Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Post by GratefulHippie on Mar 14, 2008 11:47:01 GMT -5
bos1969 said:
nahhh - I was not arguing the credit of a masterpiece just the issue of who has the right to call it a masterpiece. Where did the guidelines for a masterpiece come from? How come a credited art historian gets to say it is a masterpiece? In other words - why does his opinion mean more then mine?
I am not saying that there are not masterpieces out there - I am just saying that I refuse to believe that something is or is not a masterpiece just because I am told that what I how I should look at it and perceive it. I never have been good at being told what to do or what to think.
oh no - help me - I think the hippies have finally gotten ahold of me and turned me into a liberal that thinks for herself ;D
I think they (as a group) get to declare things a masterpiece because they are "credited art historians" I assume that means they went to school to learn how to appraise the different aspects of art. Therefore they get to make such calls. You don't have to agree. That is why their opinion means more, because they are credited and trained. People tend to listen to others that are trained and schooled on a subject more than someone who is not.
I think they (as a group) get to declare things a masterpiece because they are "credited art historians" I assume that means they went to school to learn how to appraise the different aspects of art. Therefore they get to make such calls. You don't have to agree. That is why their opinion means more, because they are credited and trained. People tend to listen to others that are trained and schooled on a subject more than someone who is not.
well put, thank you this clears up why art critics are credited
nahhh - I was not arguing the credit of a masterpiece just the issue of who has the right to call it a masterpiece. Where did the guidelines for a masterpiece come from? How come a credited art historian gets to say it is a masterpiece? In other words - why does his opinion mean more then mine?
I am not saying that there are not masterpieces out there - I am just saying that I refuse to believe that something is or is not a masterpiece just because I am told that what I how I should look at it and perceive it. I never have been good at being told what to do or what to think.
oh no - help me - I think the hippies have finally gotten ahold of me and turned me into a liberal that thinks for herself ;D
are you sure we aren't sisters or something?
and - yes - we may very well be sisters - wait - we get along too well to be sisters....
I think they (as a group) get to declare things a masterpiece because they are "credited art historians" I assume that means they went to school to learn how to appraise the different aspects of art. Therefore they get to make such calls. You don't have to agree. That is why their opinion means more, because they are credited and trained. People tend to listen to others that are trained and schooled on a subject more than someone who is not.
well put, thank you this clears up why art critics are credited
And now we are back at the issue of Kid Rock - not everyone likes him but that does not mean that he is not talented
Im glad to see that after my lil break from inforoo to get some work done, this thread has gotten back to Kid Rock, who by the way is not talented .
anyway tho, it is pretty awesome of Kid Rock to take us on this journey of a thread
see - this starts the journey agaon - I though we had cleared this up - YOU don't think he is talented but that does not mean that he is not talented - that is just your opinion ;D
Post by Darth Boo Boo Kitty @#*& on Mar 14, 2008 12:50:29 GMT -5
bos1969 said:
see - this starts the journey agaon - I though we had cleared this up - YOU don't think he is talented but that does not mean that he is not talented - that is just your opinion ;D
Maybe the dispute shouldn't be whether or not he's talented, but WHAT his talent actually is. B/c in my opinion and that of 9.99 out of 10 accredited critics, his talent isn't musical. ;D
Sure there were one or two songs from Kid Rock that i liked... the duet with sheryl crow was nice but the sh*t he said about radiohead just rubbed me the wrong way. I dont want someone who would sat that kinda stuff anywhere near Roo. Luckily im not worried that it'll ever happen.
Post by melloashello on Mar 14, 2008 13:05:42 GMT -5
it is a masterpiece in the ears or eyes of the viewer. if someone else does not like it, they do not have to recognize it as a masterpiece. just because an art book or an art critic claims that "Starry Night" is a masterpiece doesn't mean it cannot appear as a swirling splotch of crap on a canvas to someone else. only YOU can decide if it is a masterpiece.
Post by melloashello on Mar 14, 2008 13:08:11 GMT -5
oh and about kid rock, haha, i don't really enjoy his music but it doesn't matter to me if he is there. I am sure there is someone who might go check him out.
I think it is up to the experts to decide what is and what is nor a masterpiece. It is up to you to decide if you like that particular persons masterpiece or not. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the term masterpiece is used to signify the artists best or "master" works. The historians and art experts generally agree from artist to artist. Good grief, no one is holding a gun to your head saying "You half to think this is awesome because we said so!" That is up to you, but makes it no less a masterpiece. It's just a masterpiece you don't like.
Originally, the term masterpiece (or chef d'œuvre) referred to a piece of handcrafted art produced by a journeyman aspiring to become a master craftsman in the old European guild system, which is partially retained today in Germany and France. These were (or are) typically perfect pieces of handicraft art, admired for their beauty and elegance.
i think this pretty much sums up why Kid Rock sucks....
Kid Rock on Radiohead - "I mean, I'm sure nice guys, and we could probably have a beer and have a great time hanging out, but I don't just don't like the music," he said. "I do not get it at all. I haven't given a lot of it a chance. It might be ignorant on my part, but for the most part I've seen a few live things and heard some records. If I'm having a party and I've got some chicks over hanging out, and all my boys are hanging out, I'm not grabbing for the Radiohead CD. Flat out, it's not gonna happen. If I'm in the office with all my computer buddies and we're trying to design a website, I might put on Radiohead."
selling a lot of records doesnt make you talented, it makes ur record label and promotion team talented. I dont get the idea that if a lot of people like something this in turn makes that good. I mean almost all the people of germany loved Hitler at first. (yes, I am comparing kid rock to Hitler)
obviously record labels and promotion teams love trying to make money off untalented people.
i think this pretty much sums up why Kid Rock sucks....
Kid Rock on Radiohead - "I mean, I'm sure nice guys, and we could probably have a beer and have a great time hanging out, but I don't just don't like the music," he said. "I do not get it at all. I haven't given a lot of it a chance. It might be ignorant on my part, but for the most part I've seen a few live things and heard some records. If I'm having a party and I've got some chicks over hanging out, and all my boys are hanging out, I'm not grabbing for the Radiohead CD. Flat out, it's not gonna happen. If I'm in the office with all my computer buddies and we're trying to design a website, I might put on Radiohead."
this is not the quote i was refering to. Actually i dont find this offensive at all. If i had to guess i'd say this is what started the whole thing and radiohead responded to it negativly and it went back and forth till it finally got nasty. I looked on google and cant find the quote that i was remembering. Oh well, who cares
I'm sorry, but I saw Kid Rock back in...um...damn, like 2000? Maybe '01? He put on a great show, not gonna lie. Would I go see him at 'Roo? Yes, so long as he didn't conflict with some of my must sees. Do I think he belongs at 'Roo? No, but then I don't think Metallica should be there either...
And to kill my karma further, Powerman 5000 opened for Kid Rock that night and also were fantastic! Ah, the old nu-metal angsty high school days.
