Would Sup Forums agree these are the artistic highpoints of their mediums?
Would Sup Forums agree these are the artistic highpoints of their mediums?
this is the patrician version of that other chart
If you're some kind of angst-ridden high school freshman, sure.
...
Replace OKC with this.
radiohead is the musical equivalent of harry potter
Literally Sup Forums taste: the chart.
When will the jodorowsky is good meme stop?
>Anonymous
absolutely not
Please stop
In Rainbows son
>American Psycho
>apex of literature
>video games
When you can turn your shit taste into gold
Yeah, I would agree. But why did you select such a random collection of artists? BEE, Radiohead, Jodorowsky... what's yoking these selections together?
>infinite jest
>perfect from now on
>synecdoche, new york
>mother 3
better answers tbqh
>American Psycho
>High point of literature.
You need to read more, my friend.
More like A Farewell to Arms, Tago Mago, Metropolis, and Symphony of the Night
not sure that the bottom right is really art
Video games can't be art
Not Available
Dog Star Man
Gravity's Rainbow
>Video games can't be art
>Those picks
>Video games can't be art
Fashionista aren't we, eh?
Catch 22
First Utterance
The Big Lewbowski
New Vegas
Because obviously my opinion is the objective truth
>shadow of the colossus
>not mgs2
fucking kek
Nah, "Sup Forums taste" is good taste. Most interest boards are filled with enthusiasts.
Sup Forums is a fucking garbage board filled with 13 year old retards. 13 year old taste =/= Sup Forums taste
I read American Psycho in three days in the summer and it was fucking terrible.
But with books and movies I always have some weird compulsion to finish them when i start them, so i did, but it was just fucking awful.
Real version.
Videogames can't be art.
Video games can NEVER be considered art. Even if a video game has a god-tier narrative, soundtrack, or visuals it still isn't art. Video games are games, that is to say you play a video game to win, as it is a game just like Monopoly or chess. You don't play a video game to appreciate the narrative, that's what film and literature are for. Games are not art. Games serve a completely different function than art does.
>english lit
>artistic highpoint of literature
L M A O
drink some bleach
>Videogames can't be art.
no, no, no and no
In Search Of Lost Time
Der Ring Des Nimbelungen
Man With A Movie Camera
Silent Hill 2
>man with a movie camera
Don't make me fucking laugh.
Go away pleb.
Solid taste.
video games are not art
It's interactive art, people spend years on different aspects of the game, the art style, the music, the mechanics, the story. It's literally every form of "art" put into one giant place for you to explore.
It was pretty influential at the time but D.W. Griffith did a better job with Birth of a Nation by incorporating an actual narrative into the movie and this was in the mid 1910's. It's simply a glorification of the technology which is fine, but crowning it as the #1 film ever seems shortsighted, no?
well, Sup Forums?
don quixote
velvet underground & nico
andrei rublev
vidya != art you disgusting posmo fucks
What is so good about Proust's autistic nitpicking
What so good about meme 'cinema' like this and Empire which don't slightly challenge the medium?
What is so good about hit enemies continuously with the pipe until dead?
Pop music can't be art
imbecile
>andrei rublev
>tvu&n
you sound boring as shit
1st > 3rd > 2nd
I keep posting this but y'all are too pleb to understand
This was made by a hoghschooler.
if you removed every nintendo game from the vidya chart we might be close to getting started on something good
It fucking sucks.
nintendo is the best video gzme company though, they recognize that most, (if not all) video game storylines (witcher, skyrim, cod and the like) are awful because of the uninteresting story lines so instead cut them out and focus entirely on the arm of game design and game play.
solid film section
where'd ya find this
filtered
Sup Forums taste isn't that bad dude
I seen youve been browsing various Sup Forums boards for 3 weeks now. Impressive. How are you finding the switch from leddit?
i made it last year and posted it a few times on Sup Forums before
your "traditional" art section needs work as it almost completely ignores art after 1950
putting in a johns and a miro does not a well versed chart make
>art after 1950
what would you put there?
>american psycho
what in the fuck
>you play a video game to win
that is absolutely wrong you fucking retard
actually play video games, then try to criticize them
>you don't play a video game to appreciate the narrative
blatantly fucking wrong
why are you trying to tell people why they do things
bahahahaha
is that man with a movie camera?
is that david lynch shit, and eraserhead worst of all?
is that le hungarian 3000 page man?
bro youre a fucking first month poser.
Nice Sup Forums neo-logic. Care to tell me where I'm wrong?
Describe what's wrong with Eraserhead without mentioning his fanbase or image.
American psycho is a good novel, buy there are probably a million better books you could have chosen
Not horrible. Some stuff missing, some could easily be replaced, but overall not bad.
Because you just made incorrect statements. You don't play a video game to win and you don't not play a video game to appreciate the narrative. You're trying to state the intentions of every person who's played a video game, including me. Which means I can refute this reaaaaal fuckin easily by saying in contradicts my own experience.
no, super mario 64 is the artistic highpoint for video games. unparalleled mechanical complexity. it perfectly suits video games as a medium.
SoTC is nice but a lot of it can be described through other artistic terms. SM64 is something that would be completely impossible in any other medium, because it's literally 100% about interaction.
Underrated post
Has the last video game you played been Pong? Video games have long past the pure game stage. Many videogames aren't made to be won, but to be finished, the way you finish a book, or a film. There are lots of developers that focus on creating a unique to the medium experience instead of just a game. Besides I don't see why it being a game should disqualify it for being art, chess could certainly be argued for being art.
The same people say about video games have also been said about other mediums. Novels were purely thought of as entertainment value with little thought about their artistic value. Goethe still wrote in the 18th century that he sees the novel format as a lesser art form and that only poetry and epics can truly achieve art.
kek
>the female quixote
>that dragon, cancer and more cinematic indieshit
lmao ok, this is some abysmal taste tbqh
>cinematic indieshit
lol like what
you think I'm kidding, but I'm 100% serious. the idea that games need to have a "narrative" or tell a good story like film in order to be considered art is inherently flawed.
gameplay is what defines a game, therefore that's what defines it's value in art.
wrong person?
carl andre
john baldessari
georg baselitz
basquiat
chris burden
james turrell
dan flavin
chuck close
donald judd
phillip guston
yayoi kusama
yoko ono
joan mitchell
judy chicago
pat steir
gerhard richter
julie mehretu
yinka shonibare
bill viola
andy warhol
>yoko ono
n
>american fucking psycho
what
she was involved in fluxus and the development of performance and conceptual art
she helped break down gender and culture barriers in the art world
she was more talented and more important than any member of the beatles
>Heavy Rain
Dropped
The definition of tasteless- this is just a bunch of critically/publically approved shit with a pretty image for each.
meh i saw her exhibit at the guggenheim and it was pretty shite t b h with you laddy
this guy
>Metropolis
M is Lang's real masterpiece.
oh don't get me wrong her art after she got into music is garbage
however, everything before is extremely influential
like The Stanley Parable
walking simulators are cancer and try to shove 'cinematic' meta wankering in lieu of gameplay, which is the most important feature of vidya.
you can't create a masterpiece if you are imitating another medium
Christgau was 100% right about tago mago- the most pointless album in existence. definitely for posers and 16 year olds.
>cuckgau
>100% right about something
lmao
I mean, if you're not smart enough to get past his pretentious writing I'd see where you're coming from- or alternatively you're just said pseudo intellectual 16 year old.
Tago mago is 100% just adapting jazz to a rock format. Its existence is 100% pointless.
How can I be as cool as you
super mario 64 is a borderline tech demo. Levels look unfinished and stars are placed at random throughout all the levels, and the game doesn't take advantage of its pseudo open world level design. It's fun, but its only held up by the fact that it was the first of its kind and nostalgia.
lmao
fuck off pannen
just dont be someone who only "got into" music 6 months ago
As someone who practices art I find this OP incredibly offensive.
None of them are even close. You're not even looking at media here; you're looking at consumer based industries.
Then what's your definition of media o woke one
I've noticed these posts never actually even mention anything about what IS le real art or whatever. It's a weird correlation.
I don't have my own personal definition. A medium is a means of doing something and in terms of creative output it refers to the discipline* which was used to communicate whatever the idea that gave cause to the work is.
In the case of the OP, there are commercial formats belonging to 4 media. Music and the tradition of recording an album aren't the same thing, et.c. I will note here that contemporary music is most often made in an attempt to mirror the approach to creating an art-work, but it's still massively diluted by the consumer-pandering ideology behind the practice of recording the album. Re-apply to the other 3.
What are you confused about? Art is it's own, separate thing. There's cinema, there's music, there's literature and there's art. Art can be made doing literally anything, so calling anything else 'an art' is retarded. There are intersections, some works cross classifications.
Take it like this:
To people here, not knowing who Swans are would be pretty embarrassing. To people who actually know what art is, not knowing who Anish Kapoor is is really embarrassing.
If you don't know who Anish Kapoor is then you don't really know what art is. You're on the internet so look it up yourself, I'm not paid to teach you.
I was implying people that say that are just trying to look like le intellectuals- they also tend to namedrop.
and here you are namedroping le meme sculpt. you cant just namedrop and then expect your definition to hold up. all in all/tldr; youre a massive poser faggot.
>"it's- it's mainstream!" XD
I don't know which learning disability you have, but trying to argue by randomly spouting buzzwords is fucking stupid and trying to derail a discussion because you tried to call someone out and then got confused when they explained their point more thoroughly is just really sad.
All I'm saying is you're another faggot with a dime a dozen superiority complex on Sup Forums. What a shock. You're using le big words (that you no doubt will say hey, those are totally normal words. people use them in everyday conversation, im not being pretentious) and you feel the need to "define" basic shit in a condescending and overly long tone. youre just a faggot, like I said earlier.
tl;dr this user is retarded
>superiority
oh I bet you think you're so smart and better for using such big words like whatever that shit is
>superiority complex
Yeah, explaining things as they are in a discussion is definitely a superiority complex and not just proper discussion. On the other hand, defensive shit-flinging because you misuse words and don't want to admit it is definitely appropriate, you're right - how foolish of me.
>big words
What 'big words' did I even use?
>pretentious
You obviously don't know what that means, m8
>you feel the need to "define" basic shit in a condescending and overly long tone
Yeah, because when someone asks for a definition and you give it to them it's obviously 'faggotry'.
You've got some sort of disorder, I think it's called "a complete lack of self-awareness and overbearing sense of self-righteousness that makes you attack anything that defies your assumed definitions of things because you like to rant about things you know nothing about but refuse to listen to an explanation by someone who actually does know about them". It's also called 'reddit-user syndrome' and is a side-effect of using the epic downvote on anything that isn't a pat on the back. Go back there, this place was shit enough before you idiots came along.
its generally funny how people who accuse others (or insult, rather) of "lack of self awareness" tend to be the least aware people. its just strange.