[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 85 KB, 523x389, hacks.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4059839 No.4059839[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

10 Worst Talentless Hacks of All Time:

1. Lou Reed
2. Andy Warhol
3. William Basinski
4. Gen Urobuchi
5. Taku Sugimoto
6. David Lynch
7. Merzbow
8. David Foster Wallace
9. James O'Rourke
10. Lil B

There is no arguing against this fact. Deal with it, nerds.

>> No.4059843

Approve of 10/10 names on that list. /lit/ supports you.

>> No.4059845

Literature.

>> No.4059852

>>4059843
>replying to an OP post in the same minute its posted with shameless praise
it's like you don't even know how to samefag

>> No.4059854

This guy's on to something.

(Quite like Walk on the Wild Side, though).

>> No.4059859

>Warhol
>talentless

do you even read The Painted Word by Tom Wolfe?

>> No.4059862

>Lynch
gonna get your whole shit ended, friendo

>> No.4059869

>>4059859
is that the same guy who wrote bonfire of the vanities, why the fuck would i read some shit on art by him

>> No.4059870

Remove DFW from the list and I agree.

>> No.4059877
File: 7 KB, 214x252, 1312045284872.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4059877

>>4059839
2/10 for making me post

>> No.4059879

>>4059839
>8. David Foster Wallace
OP confirmed for never having read Oblivion

>> No.4059882

>>4059879
Is that the one with Tom Cruise?

>> No.4059896

>>4059859
Warhol had no artistic talents whatsoever and he's the main person responsible for all the kitsch and trash in the world right now.

>> No.4059908

>>4059896
Warhol was good in one thing only: convincing people that they could make their own art. Inspiring that instinct is important. What is sad is that he became a famous millionaire because of it. If he had just been the Bob Ross of his time, with a PBS show where he showed people how to make cheap pop-art to decorate their own homes or dorm rooms, that would have been a great thing. Instead, the art world misinterpreted his worth and positioned him as some sort of artistic god.

>> No.4059914

>>4059839
William basinski is great shut up

>> No.4059918

>>4059908
Warhol is responsible for all the talentless hacks in the world. Yeah he convinced people they could make their own art (every shitty pseudo-deep "painter", and any avant-garde musician of today, Merzbow, Keiji Haino, the list goes on).

Stockhausen also belongs on that list.

>> No.4059920

>>4059896
we're living in kitsch times bro he was just updating art to reflect our production and consumption habits, we all want to believe our lives will be in the "post-modern" chapter of the 45th edition of Jansen's but really everything from 1950-2250 is just going to be in one big chapter called The Kitsch Era.

>> No.4059923

>>4059914
Basinski is a horrible musician who even failed at his attempt to digitize his aged magnetic tape recordings. He's a one-trick-pony. All he can do is make loops. William Basinski can't be particularly well praised for his efforts on this series of music, if anything he has failed at what he set out to do which was simply to transfer some pre-existing tape loops to a more secure and durable method of recording sound. As the tapes began to get chewed up and fall apart in his machine they somehow took on a life of their own, and Basinski, like many modern artists making a living out of God knows what, cleverly attached meaning and significance to something that was completely beyond his control and then sold it to the masses for a high sum of money, thus making money out of doing nothing. Basinski was even luckier than the average loft-dwelling artsy type as his recordings were made just as the world changed and the twin towers burned to the ground thus adding to the fascinating story behind some old tapes getting chomped up in a machine.

>> No.4059925
File: 45 KB, 420x480, wol0-005.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4059925

>>4059869
because he rocks white suits and is pretty damn smart

>> No.4059929

>>4059920
That's an interesting way to look at it, I'd upboat your post if we were on reddit.

>> No.4059930

>>4059918
The avant-garde music world didn't need Andy Warhol to get started. They had their own models.

There was nothing avant-garde about Warhol anyway. He was pop-art. Pop-art is a style. It's a shallow style, but it's easy to "get" for a lot of people. It's like pop-music. The Lady Gagas and Chris Browns and whatever else of the world owe their careers to Warhol and his handlers. Avant garde is something completely different.

>> No.4059931

>>4059925
he looks like a lesbian dressed up as that KFC guy

>> No.4059934

>>4059930
no, gay ass reniassance faggotry with a bunch of photorealistic paintings of biblical scenes is "easy to get" warhols work is much more challenging, which is exactly why you can't deal with it

>> No.4059937

>>4059896
I used to think that until I saw the Warhol retrospective in Paris... the man was much more thoughtful than the average person believes. I feel like the only kind of people who share your opinions are the ones who have never seen his work in real life. You should at least read some more about his work; even a chapter in an art history textbook would talk about some of his more interesting pieces.

Warhol is a lot less responsible for the kitschy shit in contemporary art nowadays than most of the other pop artists.

>> No.4059941

>>4059908
His whole 'thang' was born out of a desire to rail against the small-town, Catholic mindset enforced on him from childhood.

>> No.4059943
File: 150 KB, 597x800, 2007TomWolfe231.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4059943

>>4059931
haters gon hate

>> No.4059946
File: 65 KB, 500x359, redcarcrash.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4059946

>> No.4059947

>>4059870

Faggot

>> No.4059950
File: 63 KB, 719x674, 1372306961701.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4059950

>>4059839
See, your biggest failing is that you're coming on too strong. You should've mixed in a few artists that are commercially popular but a bit disliked on here to achieve actual butthurt. Also, you're fucking absymal at samefriending (>>4059843), as has been pointed out (>>4059852).

>> No.4059953

>>4059937
I never saw his work in real life, but I don't think that would change my opinion on him. I read a lot about him before to try to understand the hype behind him and why people tend to love him and praise him so much, but I still don't get it.

I also watched and read some interviews with Andy Warhol and to be honest, I was fairly disappointed. I had truly expected him to be more eloquent and meaningful, and I thought that he's a smart man because of all the "amazing" (as people say) things he made. But I guess that there is nothing really that deep or amazing about his work, or if there is, it is purely accidental and not because he wanted it to be that way.

>> No.4059955

>>4059953
He had an IQ slightly higher than Forrest Gump. There wasn't too much depth available to him.

>> No.4059956

>>4059920
2250? How do you suppose this kitsch era will come to an end?

>> No.4059957

>>4059941
totally wrong lmao wow people really don't understand warhol do they? first of all he was eastern orthodox...second his art embraced and continued that tradition! don't you realize "pop art" is secular religious art? compare some of his gold marilyns to byzantine icons

>> No.4059959

>>4059839

>6. David Lynch

You may personally dislike him (personally I think all his trans meditation schtick is lamentable bullshit) but his praise as a director has been earned. The man is a true auteur and one of the most original directors in the history of cinema. He shouldn't be on this list.

>> No.4059962

>>4059955
>He had an IQ slightly higher than Forrest Gump

That's just an urban legend it's not actually true. Warhol was at least average and possibly above average intelligence.

>> No.4059963

>>4059953
dude how fucking square are you bro? lmao if this interview pisses you off you're probably some republican goof

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deRMRh8Zjgg

>> No.4059971

>>4059953
Warhol's often stated that his art provides more questions than answers.

>> No.4059972

>>4059953
oh you are looking at him all wrong!


he IS overpraised, very overrated for the wrong reasons, and by the same token, underrated by art snobs who don't take a second look.

> I had truly expected him to be more eloquent and meaningful

but he was awkward and shy, almost troglodytic, but also prolific and innovative. Part of his genius was charming the NYC elite into patronizing him, part of his genius was his talent for managerial work in The Factory


>I never saw his work in real life
that is really part of the problem. trust me, it would help, I've been there

>> No.4059973

>>4059959
>his trans meditation schtick is lamentable bullshit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0payvR--nM
kinda worth watching, i'm always skeptical about this kind of stuff and documentaries, but this one was kinda convincing

>> No.4059977

>>4059937
>if anything he has failed at what he set out to do

He was a dreadful suck-up though. Like his portrait of Knox hanging in the Albright-Knox museum. KEK.

>> No.4059981

>>4059972
yeah, there are a lot of influential "warhol investors" who trade in his work almost exclusively and have a strong financial interest in promoting him to keep the values in their investments rising...but in a lot of ways this plays right into what he was doing, haha

>> No.4059987

Replace DFW with Murakami and I'll agree with you.

Haruki Murakami is a plagiarist and an untalented, unimaginative author.

He stole the name for his book "1Q84" from George Orwell's most famous work entitled "1984".

Ha! How clever, I'll replace the "9" with "Q" and no one will notice anything! Even though Q and 9 are homophones in Japanese language and pronouncing the names of these two novels in Japanese would sound the same.

But this wasn't the first time something like this happened. Seven years earlier, he used Franz Kafka's last name to name the main protagonist of his novel "Kafka on the Shore" and basically the book itself.

He also took the name of that the Beatles song "Norwegian Wood" for that title of his one book.

Why is this guy so uncreative? Why does he have to steal things from other authors?

And why are his books so awful and nonsensical? If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit, right?

>> No.4059988

>>4059977
don't you consider it radical to make money making portraits in an era when people thought portraits were "dead"?

>> No.4059990

>>4059963
The man was a fucking retard, that interview just proves it.

>> No.4059991

>>4059908
>showed people how to make cheap pop-art to decorate their own homes or dorm rooms, that would have been a great thing
why would that be a great thing? sounds even worse than his current value:
1. highly regarded by art critics that support the progression of art post-duchamp
2. disregarded (as an artist) by hard-working artists and general population
3. the techniques and aesthetics he popularized being used ad nauseum to sell merchandise.

>>4059918
and this statement is just too ignorant. you can tell the same about duchamp or the modernist poets (when creating automatic techniques that require no actual input by the artist). the truth is that no one man is responsible for hacks. some people simply have a talent for sliding over the world and getting fed by fools. they are not a modern phenomena

>> No.4059993

>>4059839
Warhol was very talented. You should see the guy draw. He was a top illustrator in New York long before he became famous for his pop-art.

>> No.4060002

>>4059977
>Like his portrait of Knox hanging in the Albright-Knox museum
Wait, waht?

>> No.4060003

So... are someone's painting abilities directly proportional to the quality of art they make?

Are instrument-playing abilities directly proportional to musical quality?

>> No.4060004

>>4059988
critics thought portraits were dead, not people. art critics and philosophers also said art is dead (i.e. Hegel explaining how art was excelled by philosophy in its supposed function). there are always apocaliptic critics, they are just fools saying foolish things in a clever way...

>> No.4060010

>>4059991
>disregarded (as an artist) by hard-working artists and general population

i don't think you know any artists hardworking or otherwise

>> No.4060013

>>4059987
omg I can't believe Joyce stole the name "Ulysses" from Homer, what an untalented hack

>> No.4060014
File: 61 KB, 500x322, CRI_151138.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4060014

I mean, I find this Warhol piece to actually be somewhat powerful. Sorry for the small size, the repeated image on the left is of a car crash, there are a few dead bodies in it. It makes you wonder about the completely empty right side. Idk, I like some of his work

>> No.4060017

>>4059988

No, why would that be considered radical? It's not like Lucien Freud didn't re-invigorate the portrait.

>> No.4060020

>>4059987
I agree that Murakami is shit but your points of criticism better be a joke. You can't seriously confuse obvious referential intentions (alas, lame ones) with plagiarism or stealing...

>> No.4060021

>>4059991
a fellow art history student! My dream has come true!

>> No.4060022

>>4059991
Not many people say Warhol wasn't hardworking. The guy became notorious for working 48 hour shifts or more without any sleep (he starting taking speed to be able to do this more often)

>> No.4060027

>>4060017
no one paid lucien freud to be in his portraits in fact he most likely had to pay his models, what i'm talking about are the ruling class paying the artists to make their portrait

>> No.4060031
File: 77 KB, 640x480, 1338169979049.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4060031

I like Basinski, go fuck yourself.

>> No.4060033

>>4059981
thank god many of this warhols lose value by the day thanks to the large number of "false" works of arts in circulation. an unavoidable consequence of the lack of difficulty in mking and reproducing them

>> No.4060037

>>4060003
>So... are someone's painting abilities directly proportional to the quality of art they make?
Yes.

>Are instrument-playing abilities directly proportional to musical quality?
Yes.

Anyone who claims otherwise will probably also claim that this is "music":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9kzGTJ14ek
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3zeYV4oN2A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHs0LkixGvY

>> No.4060041

>>4060037
if it fulfills a function as music, it's music.

>> No.4060043

>>4060033
there's less fake warhol than a lot of people since they are all series

>> No.4060044

>>4060014
>find this Warhol piece to actually be somewhat powerful. Sorry for the small size, the repeated image on the left is of a car crash, there are a few dead bodies in it. It makes you wonder about the completely empty right side.
I doubt it was intentionally or he saw it the same way you do, but then again lots of authors and poets and visual artists are like this. That's why when we interpret and analyze a work of art we don't put too much stock in what the author of that work thinks.

>> No.4060040

>>4060037
It's instruments making musical notes, whether you like it or not, it is music.

>> No.4060047

>>4060037
>Anyone who claims otherwise will probably also claim that this is "music":
>Music For 4 Stringed Instruments
It has music clearly in the title do you even music

>> No.4060048

woah i just had a scarey thought, what if /lit/ knows as little about literature as it does about art

>> No.4060056

>>4060044
Well this piece was part of a large series on death, so that's what really makes me think

>> No.4060058

>>4060027
perhaps at first they didn't pay him. then they paid him tons, man... the ruling class doesn't usually risk it in ANY kind of art. they look for a guarantee because it's an investment. so freud not being paid at first says nothing. also. the ruling class does listen to art critics because art criticism affects art trends and work value, therefore, their investment so it's again, not radical at all. just critics exaggerating things

>> No.4060060

>>4060002

I've seen his work at the Albright Knox, one of which is a portrait of Seymour Knox, an uber-rich dude whose father founded the Woolworth's chain of stores.

I'm going to do a portrait of Seymour Knox, a retail magnate, so he can tout my work, preserve it, and patronize me for flattering him. MMMM OK ANDY. The best thing about Warhol was that the art scene around him inspired that great sequence in Midnight Cowboy.

>> No.4060064

>>4060044
>I doubt it was intentionally
no serious artist does anything unintentionally

>> No.4060065

>>4060048

I know right?

What are they going to do next? Talk about how Hitler was such a great artist and he should've been admitted to art school?

>> No.4060066

>>4060040
>>4060041
>>4060047
You know, they usually tend to say that music has a really loose definition... but in this case I think it could actually be argued that this is not music by definition. Music is supposed to have rhythm and melody. Now, I willing to forgo the melody part and say that rhythm alone could be considered music. These sounds have no discernible pattern that could be called a rhythm nor do they have particularly concise pitches with which a melody could be made.

>> No.4060067

I don't see Christopher Nolan on your list OP/

>> No.4060069

>>4060010
I actually do since I'm an "artist" myself. Meaning only that it's my line of work, not that I'm a special snowflake. You're judging someone on the internet based on thin air, mate

>> No.4060070

>>4060048

>scarey

Stop posting here you fucking moron.

>> No.4060071

>>4059839
Going to have to agree 90% with this one.
I like Foster Wallace, think he's done some good stuff.
Andy Warhol is a piece of shit though.
I like The Velvet Undergroun too, but Lou Reed did fucking suck.

>> No.4060074

Thanks for this thread, I love you /lit/. Even though OPs post was probably a troll, I love how everyone replied seriously and there's some discussion here. This is definitely the best board on 4chan and it's been like this for a long time.

>> No.4060076

>>4060066
>Music is supposed to have rhythm and melody

So is this not music?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLe_-ZZbs5k

>> No.4060077

>>4060069
post some of your art? ten bucks says it's bad

>> No.4060080

>>4060076
There's melody in it.

>> No.4060083

being a photorealistic oil painter in the era of the color photograph is like being the best horse wrangler in the era of the SUV, no one cares, history has moved on

>> No.4060084

>>4060077
There's no such thing as "bad" or "good" art.

>> No.4060086

>>4060003
ability is a very important factor but obviously not the only one. I for one think it's a necessary factor at the very least, but not a sufficient one

>> No.4060090

>>4060084
ever been to deviantart.com?

>> No.4060091

>>4060071
>Andy Warhol is a piece of shit though.

read the thread

>> No.4060094

>>4060083
not always. ever hear of irony?

>> No.4060096

>>4059839

i agree with all, except one

either you really haven't listened to basinsky's disintegration loops, or you're just a pleb

>> No.4060097

lol i didnt know the general pleblic hated warhol so much, that's one good thing about the internet, puts you in touch with the common man

>> No.4060098

Why is Urobuchi on the list?

>> No.4060100

>>4060077
1. I didn't say it's good
2. Whether is good or bad is irrelevant to my statements (since those statements related in no way to my own work)
3. Whether it is good or bad you will find it bad because it is in you think that supports your position.
4. Even when it clearly does not affect our arguments in one way or the other you will take it as a victory to discredit my work in any way you find fit
5. I can do things that will actually earn me ten bucks, instead of taking bets for imaginary money that will never come my way

As you see i win nothing by posting my work in the current state of the conversation

>> No.4060102

>>4060097

>lol i didnt know the general pleblic hated warhol so much

yes you did you posturing wanker

>> No.4060104

>>4060100
making furry porn for neckbeard creeps does not make you a "real artist" bro

>> No.4060106

>>4060083
I don't know, mate. Horse wranglers are still impressive and there are still people that pay to see things that history has "left behind"

>> No.4060107

>>4060097
fuck off retard

>> No.4060108

This guy is utter shit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Wolfe

>> No.4060109

>>4060102
no seriously it kind of took me by surprise, i mean i know everyone hates basquiat since he's a black guy and "their kid could do that" but i thought the average pleb was ok with warhol

>> No.4060110

>not one mention of Jackson Pollock

>> No.4060111

>>4060106
well yes but at this point "technical art" is really just "craft" at best, parlor trick at worst

>> No.4060115

>>4060109

I never got basquiat. I need to see some of his work next time I'm in NYC I guess

>> No.4060116

>>4060104
I don't make furry porn, i never said I was a "real" artist either though, if you read above. Anyways, your post deserves a more childish answer like. "then why do you keep paying me for it, bro? huehueuehu"

>> No.4060114

>>4060109

you are trying too hard

you should probably go ahead and stop that now

>> No.4060118

>>4060108
completely agree

>> No.4060122

>>4060110

Jackson Pollack is surprisingly good when you see his actual paintings, rather than mere images of his paintings. They have rhythm and a keen sense of colour.

>> No.4060125

Aren't there probably worse talentless hacks we've just never heard of?

I like Merzbow.

>> No.4060126

Kim Ki-duk, the list goes on.

>> No.4060127

>>4060111
Totally mate. i'm just arguing that the problem is not that history has "moved on" but that craft, technical achievement, is not enough. In my opinion though, technical ability is necessary but as someone said above, never sufficient

>> No.4060129

what about keith haring? hack or legit?

>> No.4060130

>>4060125
How can you like Merzbow? I listened to about 7 of his albums because I wanted to be "open minded" and give everything a chance, but I still don't get it.

>> No.4060131

>>4060118
>>4060108
Either you guys expected GRRM kind of shit fantasy and didn't get the picture
Or it is bait

>> No.4060134

>>4060127
if technical ability is important then somebody like buckethead must be the greatest musician, instead he's just a shreddy hack

>> No.4060135

>>4060122
meh, you get that without seeing the actual paintings too. That's precisely what I like about them. I couldn't care less about the theoretical bullshit they built around them though

>> No.4060136

>>4060130
It's noise, it's random.
There's nothing to get.

You either make a melody out of it, or you don't

>> No.4060140

>>4060135

no man, you gotta see them if you can! They are huge and have this kind of scintillation effect. Also, you can see cigarette butts in them, which is hilarious

>> No.4060141

>>4060134
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=To09Km0y8ic
Paco de Lucia is some sick technician, since it's flamenco it doesn't feel too shreddy.

Also Buckethead isn't the most technical guitarist.
Rusty Cooley is, but you shouldn't listen to him it's shit music.

>> No.4060144

Is there such thing as "low" art?

I don't think anyone can or should say that one new film about superheroes has less value than for example something from Tarkovsky. Or that anime is an inferior medium compared to film, or film compared to literature. I don't know, everything has some value to me. I still can't explain it but, ah I don't know. Every side makes good points, everything's good to me.

>> No.4060146

every art school has a half-dozen kids who can draw photo-realistic squirrels, skulls and tupacs...these guys are also the worst artists in the school, no one cares

>> No.4060148

>>4060134
the conclusion doesn't follow the premise: you are saying. if technical ability is important then someone that is purely technical is the best.

While I said technical ability is necessary (and yes, important) but NEVER sufficient. We agree that a purely technical artist is far from best, at least

>> No.4060154

>>4060140
I've seen some live. I'm just saying that you get those effects in a decent size illustration too. it's not even worth it if you need to make a trip to see them. there are other things that I rather see live, given the choice

>> No.4060155

>>4060148
well i guess what i'm saying is you shouldn't have to first spend half your life learning to paint like some pre-rafealite before doing what you really want, just learn as much technique as you need... otherwise you are a "don juan" of art, just learning skills for nothing

>> No.4060156

>>4060144
everything has some value, sure

but some are better than others

quality, philosophical depth, pathos, challenges -- this makes something high art

>> No.4060162

>>4060154

I can understand. I'm an art junkie, so when I go places to see shit, it is to museums.

>> No.4060176

>>4059839
>lil b
>talentless hack

you just can't handle the #based
#swag#yolo#swiggityswag

>> No.4060181

>>4060176
#tru #based i was getting ready to post that

>> No.4060183

>>4060176
I saw one of his "lectures". He couldn’t possibly say more generic trying-to-hard-to-be-deep shit than that (and by "he" i mean the person that wrote it for him, because his vocabulary is so fucking limited.

He's not life-changing or inspiring. Just a dude who made corny comedy songs and then decided to turn into some sort of preachy fuck when he got a little bit of hype, especially with that terrible book he wrote (somebody else wrote for him).

For those of you who actually find any form of inspirational value in Lil B's songs, the most you will ever accomplish in your life is flipping burgers at McDonald's. But that's what happens when you think someone who barely graduated high school and picked a career that he originally embraced as a joke is "inspirational" and "moving".

He's not a hero. As Fantano said Lil B is wolf in sheep's clothing, his controversy isn't accidental, it's all marketing. He's not even a real person. He named his mixtape "I'm Gay" because it's controversial, not because he believes that "words don't mean anything" or because he tried to make an anti-homophobic statement. That's just a lie, he used "gay" and "faggot" as a slur in his songs before as a serious tone.

"I bring the chopper/Cause you niggas gay/Yeah, you gay You fuckin faggot". - Lil B throwing slurs around like a true proud homophobe. :)
How very unbased of him.

You've been fooled if you really believe in all of his shit and follow that retarded "based" mentality.

Also, he lacks any musical talent, his lyrics are shit, his flow and his delivery are garbage, there isn't any intelligent wordplay, it's all trash. His lyrics wary from "Bitch I look like Hannah Montana" to "Call me Obama based god". Basically he's retarded.

And he's so delusional, bombastically calling himself "the Based God" or "the greatest rapper of all time" or asking people to protect him (what the fuck?). No wonder he's unsigned. Nobody wants that trash on their label.

>> No.4060187

>>4060155
well yeah sure. learn what you want, but learn. I'm not saying that people than cant paint like the renaissance masters are hacks, but if they disguise their lack of any ability as a rejection of ability then they are definitely hacks. bacon couldn't achieve that kind of realism even in his most realistic period but he had the good instinct of developing his own kind of painting and he worked a lot on it. warhol was a great business man but he was "proficient" precisely because he treated "his" art as an industry and others made most of it

>> No.4060188

>>4060183
wow dude ur either #based or not it really isn't that difficult

or are you just mad that he fucked ur bitch?

>> No.4060191
File: 55 KB, 499x612, 1364489534437.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4060191

>>4060183
swag
#diddnotreadlol
#hefuckedurbitch

>> No.4060193

>>4060188
he's def past his prime but u kinda had to be there

so many masterpieces

>> No.4060194

>>4060193
ur just not #based just stahp

>> No.4060195

>>4060194
fuq my bad replied the wrong guys
#sorrybasedgod

>> No.4060197

I don't see how this conclusion has occurred for these musicians, filmmakers, composers, artists etc. as a "talent-less hack" reaches high achievement through no ability of their own.
These people certainly have attained enough recognition, even if it was simply through exploiting their talent of understanding marketable creativity.

>> No.4060198

>>4060066
Music is organized sound of any sort. Ascension has no discernible pattern or meoldy, would you consider Coltrane to not be a musician? The hilarious "directly proportional to skill necessary" also applies here.

>> No.4060199

>>4060194
i'm the #basedest

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb6agGXH-GM

sorry but how can you not consider this one of the best lil-b-to-lil-b remixes of all time

>> No.4060206

>>4060130
It's noise, not music. Like the way it sounds? Listen to it. Don't like the way it sounds? Don't.

There's nothing more to it than that.

>> No.4060225

>>4060206
but maybe it's like how if you take a toilet put it in an gallery and call it art now it's art, if u take noise put it on some vinyl and sell it in a music shop now it's music

>> No.4060239

>>4060225
>but maybe it's like how if you take a toilet put it in an gallery and call it art now it's art,
except it's not. no matter how much you say it is

>> No.4060242

>>4060239
ok what if an archaelogist digs it up 3000 years from now and a bunch of people study it and write papers on 21st century latrine aesthetics?

>> No.4060245

>>4060242
shit man how come all toilets are minimalist? i mean u ever seen a baroque toilet? what if our fuckin toilets predict the dominate aesthetics of the era damn dude

>> No.4060246

>>4060242
Looking at Merzbow's very long discography makes me believe there's little effort actually being put into these albums and that they're mostly produced by some noise generator or something. I'm not sure what his personal benchmark for quality is when listening over his work before it's published, but I'd be willing to bet it's not much more complicated than "Is this ridiculous enough to redefine music?" After he assures himself the answer is "yes", he smugly smiles before sipping from his cup of baby blood.

>> No.4060247

>>4060242
idk who's to say that 3000 yrs from now there wouldn't be more specialized subjects in certain disciplines thanks to extra knowledge in information

there are some cool ass toilets being made there should be a class for that

>> No.4060253

>>4060246
but much commercial pop music is produced in a similarly mechanical and formulaic fashion so maybe its like a commentary on mass culture or something dude

>> No.4060274

>>4060242
well we have dug out many things and we recognize aesthetic qalities in them. that doesn't make them art

>> No.4060279

>>4060247
there are actually classes on toilets. not in art school but for industrial engineers that are interested in the subject there are classes specialized on toilets and industrial engineers do take in account aesthetic values

>> No.4060281

>>4060246
Frank Zappa released a shitton of albums as well. Your "very long discography" theory is bullshit.

>> No.4060283

>>4060281
frank zappa released a lot of shit and some pretty cool tracks, in a much lower number

>> No.4060289

>>4060281
Yes, but Zappa's music was actually listenable.

>> No.4060292
File: 234 KB, 450x2617, hb_1998.127.2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4060292

>>4060274

wut about swords in the met i mean they're not art they're swords but they're like still in the met n shit so like wtf did a shipment to the sword museum go to the wrong place maybe u shud call them up and let them know there was an error

>> No.4060296

>>4060289
but your theory doesn't hold, fuckhead. Read past your subjective bullshit.

>> No.4060301

>>4060292
well maybe they are in the met because they found aesthetic qualities in them? you would have to check with them, man. who the fuck knows what's their politic on swords. there's no contradiction in finding something aesthetic without it being art though, so I don't see why I should give a fuck and give a call

>> No.4060306

>>4059896
That's a common, uneducated opinion.

>> No.4060308

>>4060306
that's a common, generic and uninspired reply

>> No.4060314

>>4060296
Merzbow is objectively awful.

>> No.4060323

>>4060292
they're most likely ceremonial swords which technically have artistic funion