Have you experienced all the highest artistic achievements in music?

Have you experienced all the highest artistic achievements in music?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/lNI07egoefc?t=2m56s
youtube.com/watch?v=Zsd5kEW4kPc
twitter.com/AnonBabble

This was made by the most sophisticated neckbeard on Sup Forums. The taste in literature, art and music is specifically atrocious. You can't even bait people with this shit, get some fucking taste.

This hurts

if nothing else you can tell it's bait by beethoven

>has some of the best literature ever.
You would have to be a hipster neckbeard not see half of them as an extremely high achievement in literature.


>The Velvet Underground & Nico
>Pet Sounds
>The Black Saint & The Sinner Lady

These are objectively some of the most influential and well respected albums to exist, and for good reason.

Try Dostoievski someday.

>kek

Beethoven > Mozart

The taste is atrocious, of course Ulysses is a masterpiece but grouping it in with The Great Gatsby and 1984? Just shows you spew popular opinions like a clueless faggot. And man of course it's Mozart and Mingus as tokens when you don't know shit about the history of jazz and classical. This isn't essential, it's about the popular, acclaimed albums you like that will still give you a sense of superiority.

''most popular works of art''

>great gatsby
more like bait gatsby mediocre attempt

Moby Dick is fucking boring.

Shit reads like a textbook.

>no Bach in music
shit taste.

>All Renaissance perfect proportions is perfect art right guys?
Fuck off even Michelangelo got sick of every piece of art having to have 100% perfect proportion being the best at drawing doesn't make you the best artist.

>1984
>The Great Gatsby
Uhhh

I guess this is bait, but how is 1984 not great? If you're being a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian, I understand that.

>no fountain
this guy knows nothing about art

Ulysses and Moby Dick are clearly two of the greatest books of all time. I agree that Gatsby is overrated, but 1984 is an amazing book. The fact that you only praise Ulysses is pathetic, you're clearly just a neckbeard, hipster pseudo.

Mozart is legitimately one of the best classical composers and he's popular for an obvious reason. Jazz is my favorite genre, and you'd have to be a fool not to say that Black Saint is one of the best albums in jazz.

Fountain and OP books are more social achievements than art achievements imo.

It sounds dumb but Harry Potter did more from an author's perspective considering how many "readers" it created, especially from such a shit generation.

1984 is commoncore-core. regardless of its quality, it cant be considered a great artistic achievement if its something a 15 year old can comprehend, it just doesnt work that way. of course, i've never actually read it because i dropped out of highschool, but the point still stands.

George Orwell and Radiohead are shit-tier

Keeping in mind that your last post contained ad-hominem attacks in order to prove your point - I can't really take you seriously.
>commoncore-core
And this... Just, what?
>of course, i've never actually read it because i dropped out of highschool, but the point still stands.
Ok, at least now I know you've been baiting.

>Only classical works of art that all share certain aesthetics, where the fuck is modernism? Kandinsky, Pollock, Picasso?
>Great gatsby, no T.S. Elliot, no Kafka, no Dostoyevsky
>Shitty most popular films of decent quality
>popular albums of a few popular genres and a token classical composer
>videogames are art
FUck what a bad list

...

that was, in fact, my first post in this thread. sorry for the confusion.

Those are all ahit

Radiohead are literally awful in every single way and have no redeeming qualities, there is nothing that makes them any better than a band such as Nickelback or Alien Ant Farm. If you disagree with this, you're just pretending to like a shit band so you can appear cool and trendy to all the other worthless shills on Sup Forums sucking Thom Yorke's withered old dick.

>Pollock
>Picasso
In the same list...

yes

unfortunately I've yet to experience the highest achievement in bait, you're gonna have to try harder

explain yourself

Yeah, Picasso's got nothing on Pollock.

In terms of influence and innovation, Picasso is above. In terms of artistry, Pollock is above.

Sure, I'd probably agree with this

Picasso's work required actual talent and skill to produce. Even though his didn't gain much recognition during his lifetime, he'll always be remembered as a pioneer and one of the most important and influential artists. What Pollock did required courage and could be created by just about anyone with courage and a group of high-class friends.

If you use the work objectively unironically when describing art you legitimately have Asperger's. This isn't a joke. Take your robot brain and do some research you'll find out I'm right.

>videogames
>artistic achievements
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Also whoever made this obviously doesn't listen to classical, they just threw down Mozart to make it seem sophisticated

Further proof that Mozart is underrated.

>video games
>art
Dropped.

Here's an interesting view on Pollock's paintings:
youtu.be/lNI07egoefc?t=2m56s

Have you seen all of Pollock's work, or just the drip paintings?
Also, you saying that Picasso didn't get enough recognition during his lifetime seems to indicate you aren't very knowledgeable about the topic. The man was a fucking painter superstar.

I've seen that video, and it's one of the fucking most awful things i've ever seen. How can you even get to a point where you're that boring.

No. This is the dumbest video that anyone could concieve. It is literally something a 13-year old fool from 9gag would say. If this guy really is a professor, he shouldn't be teaching anyone.

>The taste [...] art [...] is specifically atrocious
>Michelangelo
>Leonardo
you must be either a pleb or a demented kiddo
in any of the above-mentioned cases kill yourself

>Calls actual arguments boring
>Wants to be taken seriously
Sigh...

> it cant be considered a great artistic achievement if its something a 15 year old can comprehend, it just doesnt work that way

you're completely fucking retarded, dude.

of course, i've never actually read it because i dropped out of highschool, but the point still stands.
....

So even though the book is great it's not a high artistic achievement because it's popular and accessible?

You fucking retard

We've established that he's baiting. No need for more (You)'s now.

>OK COMPUTER
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
YOU FUCKING BASTARDS, YOU MUST HAVE SHIT INSTEAD OF A BRAIN
AAAH, MY GOD :'D
YOU FUCKING DISGUSTING NORMIES

See:

>Having Spirited Away but not Star Wars

The elitism

How do you consider a work of art worth praising if could've been done with anyone with a little more courage and a group of influential friends? I'll give you the She-Wolf painting, but that's not what he got famous for.

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.

By anyone*

1984 is a great book but it's still an overrated, "I'm 14 and this is deep" one. There are loads of better distopian books out there, if you want a 1:1 parallel to actual authoritarianism Animal Farm does it better.

What do you consider the highest artistic achievements to be then?

>You don't play a video game to appreciate the narrative

Maaaaaaaan if you don't get that shit out of my face, I played Knights of The Old Republic and it's sequel just for the narrative and there are many MANY gamers who play old games just for the plot. Also why can't people have more than one reason for doing something.


The fuck is wrong with you new age niggas?

I dont think you are approaching this from the right viewpoint. A very large portion of mankind is capable of learning to draw realistically and millions of people actually can but this doesn't discredit the great renaissance painters. Pollock's work wasn't about shocking anyone or being courageous, it was genuine art that was complex and unique. Even the drip paintings are hard to recreate (I'm a painter myself and have tried to copy the technique - it came out way worse and less harmonic or complex or whatever pretentious word I should use).

Do you also consider this a seminal piece of art and human achievement?

*.

Truly a horrible chart, every section is wrong. And videogames are not art.

Myself, no (i'm the guy that is defending pollock in multiple posts in this thread).
I don't see it as great artwork in an overall sense or in a "pure" and "spiritual" sense.
It is -however- a very important step in art if you view it from a theoretical or sociological or historical view.
So yeah, it is quite a fucking achievement. You can, in a way, appreciate the form of it. It actually does remind you of a beautiful fountain or some other architectural object, then you realize that it's just a fucking toilet.

>A very large portion of mankind is capable of learning to draw realistically and millions of people actually can but this doesn't discredit the great renaissance painters.
I'm sorry, but just learning the technique, won't make you a modern day Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Durer. And how is any piece of art not unique? Sure, you can replicate something by hand, but it will never be the same as the original. So, on what merits should we praise an artist for creating something ''unique'', which could've been created by someone courageous with no discernible talent? I'm still waiting for that explanation.

>It actually does remind you of a beautiful fountain or some other architectural object, then you realize that it's just a fucking toilet.
Doesn't that degrade the artists who worked on their paintings and sculptures for years and doesn't it degrade art in general?

IM FUCKING PLYING THAT 1984 IS BETTER THAN BRAVE NEW WORLD

Just because you like it doesn't mean it's art, idiot. I wouldn't expect anything less from someone who posts trump gifs.

>Sculptures
>Moby Dick
>Beethoven
Poser detected
>1984
>New Vegas
Underage detected
>The Godfather
Normie detected
>Spirited Away
Weeaboo detected
>Beach Boys
>Ulysses
Meme detected

Unless you are proud of being a flamboyant homosexual with a boi pussy, you should stop posting this because it makes you look like a flamboyant homosexual with a bio pussy. Cant wait for Trump to exterminate you scum.

This. Brave New World is vastly superior my man

>Everything under film

Even 2001? Come on now.

Exactly, that is what I was trying to say. Just learning the technique doesn't make you shit. And Pollock isn't just technique or just courage. He stands out the same way Michelangelo stands out from people who can draw realistically.
And no, I was never saying that uniqueness is the defining characteristic of a great artwork. That's what it's all about. You can approach it as an art historian, as a philosopher, as an artist, as a sociologist, as a psycologist, as a pretentious twat, as a common guy with no knowledge about art. No one is going to be right with his definition, art isn't about that. But when you are trying to judge art or compare it, you should consider as much of different views as you can, with good arguments.

No. It might sound a little sad, but hard work or invested time have little to do with the quality of art. And they shouldn't.
I mean, if you combine all the hours that individual actors and CGI teams and so on put into a superhero movie, it exceeds the whole life of some great artists, but you won't really say that the Thor movie is a better work of art than Mona Lisa or The Metamorhosis.

Those film choices are pleb tier.

I loved radiohead before Sup Forums. I kept it to myself too because no one else I knew liked them.

>in music
>a bunch of pop music and mingus

baka at the film choices

I'd like to have a lasagna bolognese, please!

>bio pussy

>And Pollock isn't just technique or just courage.
>He stands out the same way Michelangelo stands out from people who can draw realistically.
I'm not sure if you're even serious at this point.
youtube.com/watch?v=Zsd5kEW4kPc
>No. It might sound a little sad, but hard work or invested time have little to do with the quality of art. And they shouldn't.
Are you actually comparing movies and paintings in order to prove your point? I really can't take you seriously anymore.

Some works of art that people would visit in museums and claim are brilliant are merely technical achievements in painting akin to those found in Thor or Transformers films. I'm not saying they're artistic or creative masterpieces, but they take a lot of technical skill to create, and a lot of renaissance artists are today celebrated for their technical skill too. Plebs will go into museums and focus primarily on those elements beyond anything else in the same way they'd enjoy the technical spectacle that is The Avengers.

Not saying what you're saying isn't true, but just something worth thinking about.

hey alex how are you

I'm not into video games at all, but are there any video games that are honest to god art? And a truly notable contribution to world culture and all that?

I play TF2 and Elder Scrolls stuff sometimes but I really don't care for anything in a serious way.

radiohead is pure dogshit

Just because they aren't free jazz and/or classical doesn't make them bad

good m8, how you doing?

honestly if there was one video game that could be considered, demon's souls or dark souls would stand up pretty well i think.

None. It's easier to find porn with a real artistic merit than video games with a true artistic merit.

pretty well, thanks for asking. wanna unblock me on facebook?

Man, can you actually provide a counterargument, or are you just going to point out that you cannot take me seriously?
Maybe you just don't like Jackson Pollock/are trying to approach art from this cold, analytical perspective.

Not really, no.

no no, hahaha, you don't get it... they're really bad even at doing rock and electronic music

Idk man, you have your opinion. But Kid A and The King of Limbs at least are not shit albums.

>Plebs will go into museums and focus primarily on those elements beyond anything else in the same way they'd enjoy the technical spectacle that is The Avengers.
The Avengers can be enjoyed as a technical spectacle, but so can 2001: A Space Odyssey. The latter has a lot more to offer than mere special effects.
>Plebs will go into museums and focus primarily on those elements beyond anything else
How do you ascribe meaning to and praise something like this? This could've literally been just printed.

alright, well see you around

Okay, I'm going to descend to your level and stop taking you seriously. If you think the painting in the video is the same thing as a Pollock, you are quite blind.

Jesus fucking christ are you all from 9gag? How old are you? Are your minds really so fucking shallow that you cannot comprehend a single bit about modern art?

I'm not actually this Alex guy, please don't let my mean trickery upset you :~(

oh darn you speak exactly like him and i am a cat is something he would read lmao

I've provided a counterargument.
>How do you consider a work of art worth praising if could've been done by anyone with a little more courage and a group of influential friends?
>I'm sorry, but just learning the technique, won't make you a modern day Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Durer. And how is any piece of art not unique? Sure, you can replicate something by hand, but it will never be the same as the original. So, on what merits should we praise an artist for creating something ''unique'', which could've been created by someone courageous with no discernible talent? I'm still waiting for that explanation.
And what you've said is:
>But when you are trying to judge art or compare it, you should consider as much of different views as you can, with good arguments.
Please provide those arguments that will make me reconsider my position on Jackson Pollock and actually praise him.
Please provide those arguments that will make me reconsider my position on modern art and why I should praise it.

sorry man, I feel like a dick now