[Blaise Russel]

Originally posted by vyper
Blaise how old are you? I'm not piss taking I'm serious, I'm wondering for a reason.

17.

[vyper]

Might be a teen anger thing that's yet to finish that draws you to Pollack.

[Blaise Russel]

Originally posted by vyper
Might be a teen anger thing that's yet to finish that draws you to Pollack.

Obviously so. Can't see how I missed it. Good thing you managed to tell me that my opinions are based on hormones and not, like, me analysing the way I feel when I look at something. Boy, I could have made a fool outta myself there and no mistake! Hey, one good turn deserves another - remind me to, when you express an opinion on something, write it off as something else entirely, sticking you down a rung on the ladder of humanity!

Thanks again, doc!

[vyper]

I love it when someone reinforces my own point.

[Rictor]

Piet Mondrian
Red, Blue & Yellow
1930
Oil on canvas



Dan Lebl
The Essence of Man
2004
MS Paint


edit: the reason my colours aren't better is because I'm working in Paint, which only has 256 colours. The reason I didn't use Photoshop, in which case my colours would have been identical to his, is because my HD is full and photoshop wouldn't open, "scratch disks are full".

[Blaise Russel]

Originally posted by vyper
I love it when someone reinforces my own point.

No, that wasn't teen anger. That was the mildly-pissed off response of somebody who doesn't appreciate being dismissed because 'he's a teenager', nor indeed the act itself - of discarding somebody's thoughts just because of one single aspect of the greater whole of the person.

Don't you realise how insulting

Originally posted by vyper
You don't hold your opinions because you're an individual person with individual feelings, memories, personality traits... instead, you only think those things because you're an object, a part of some gigantic faceless wall of an attribute... I do not consider you an individual, I dismiss you because you are young/old black/white fat/thin left/right gay/straight north/south rich/poor smart/dumb city/farm science/art

this is? How really, *really* annoying? How intellectually despicable and small-minded?

Hmmph. Chances are, you're just going to chortle away at the dumb teenager who doesn't even realise that he's just a big ball of fury and anger, nothing more... a raging monster that doesn't appreciate the beauty and placidity and in-terr-es-tin brushwork of Starry Night, non-complex, non-person reducible-to-a-single-attribute creature that he is.



A question for *you*, buckwheat: what would you have said if I'd been 37? Or 62? Hey, I'm gonna retire in a couple of years, and I like Pollack's work! What you gonna do now, mister? What easy dismissal of my opinions would you use there? Senility, perhaps? What?

[vyper]

If you'd been 37 or 62 I'd have just said you had **** taste.

Tbh, you're just reinforcing my point by making such an issue of it.

In addition - people DO hold certain opinions because of thier background and life, it's part of the human condition.

[Blaise Russel]

Originally posted by vyper
If you'd been 37 or 62 I'd have just said you had **** taste.

How very arrogant. Would you happen to be God?

Tbh, you're just reinforcing my point by making such an issue of it.

Well, not really. I was aiming for 'self-righteous crusader', not 'angsty teen'. Regardless, I have a tendency to be sarcastic when confronted with idiocy.

I take it that you would be okay with me saying that Tiara's opinion is completely down to her being a woman?

In addition - people DO hold certain opinions because of thier background and life, it's part of the human condition.

What? Really?

While I don't doubt that people are, at the very least, shaped by their experiences, if not defined by them, I think it's just a tad more complicated than 'you're an angsty teen, therefore you like Angry Angry Pollack'.

[vyper]

You're seeking complication where none exists.

[Taristin]

<''(^)><| ™

There. Art. Crap. And spam all at once.

Everyone has their own opinions. Whether you like it or not. Get over yourselves. Please.

Just because BR thinks it's art, and Vyper thinks it's rubbish, we have to have a thirty something post page arguing about it.

You two will never agree on what is or isn't art.

You're not even arguing about the issue any more, either. It's become a childish "The reason you like it is you're a dumb kid' thread. STOP IT. NOW.

I really wish I was a mod sometimes, to end threads like this.

[Blaise Russel]

Originally posted by vyper
You're seeking complication where none exists.

You attempt to reduce where such reduction requires omission.

Unless teenagers are 1-dimensional creatures whose sole motivation, feeling, so on so forth is anger, only anger and nothing but anger, in which case there is nothing to omit. I'd like to see you try and prove that, along with explaining all of the junk that necessarily entails it (like when does somebody stop being 'a teenager who only likes stuff because he's angry and so is it' to 'an adult who is an actual person').

'Course, what I'd really enjoy is for you to stop dodging stuff and address your blatant act of... *shudder*... ageism. Yeah, I know, now I sound like a hippy activist... that's life, I'm afraid. Oh well.

No, really. Pursuing arguments about what I would have thought were simple concepts is what I do for a living. It makes me evaluate the tenets that I hold dear and, if necessary, discard those that have no merit and no basis in fact. First, it was 'what is art?' Now it's 'can you reduce teenagers to a big ball of anger and nothing else of note?'

[Blaise Russel]

Originally posted by Raa
Just because BR thinks it's art, and Vyper thinks it's rubbish, we have to have a thirty something post page arguing about it.

Hey, I'm the one arguing for 'everyone's opinions are valid', not 'your opinion doesn't count because you are 17 (and coincidentally disagree with me)', damnit. I am the soldier of tolerance!

[Taristin]

I never said you weren't. I agree with you. I hate the sack of trash exhibit. But who am I to decide what is and isn't art?

[Blaise Russel]

Originally posted by Raa
I never said you weren't. I agree with you. I hate the sack of trash exhibit. But who am I to decide what is and isn't art?

Oh.



Damn. I was kinda hoping for another argument. Oh well.

[vyper]

Originally posted by Blaise Russel


You attempt to reduce where such reduction requires omission.

Unless teenagers are 1-dimensional creatures whose sole motivation, feeling, so on so forth is anger, only anger and nothing but anger, in which case there is nothing to omit. I'd like to see you try and prove that, along with explaining all of the junk that necessarily entails it (like when does somebody stop being 'a teenager who only likes stuff because he's angry and so is it' to 'an adult who is an actual person').

'Course, what I'd really enjoy is for you to stop dodging stuff and address your blatant act of... *shudder*... ageism. Yeah, I know, now I sound like a hippy activist... that's life, I'm afraid. Oh well.

No, really. Pursuing arguments about what I would have thought were simple concepts is what I do for a living. It makes me evaluate the tenets that I hold dear and, if necessary, discard those that have no merit and no basis in fact. First, it was 'what is art?' Now it's 'can you reduce teenagers to a big ball of anger and nothing else of note?'

It was recently proven that until 18 years old at least, teenagers hadn't developed the ability to process emotions of themselves or specifically others.

[Martinus]

[color=66ff00]Vyper, can the flamebaiting.

To judge someone by their age hints that you're the reading a book by it's cover type.
[/color]

[Rictor]

Originally posted by vyper


It was recently proven that until 18 years old at least, teenagers hadn't developed the ability to process emotions of themselves or specifically others.

Proven? Nah, all thats changed is that now, those people yelling about "no good teenagers and their music; not even music, its just noise" seem to think they have a shred of credibility. Even though I agree with you on the whole art thing, don't make stupid generalizations.

What does "process emotions" mean anyway?

[Blaise Russel]

Originally posted by vyper
It was recently proven that until 18 years old at least, teenagers hadn't developed the ability to process emotions of themselves or specifically others.

1) Doesn't mental maturation continue into early twenties or something? Is what I heard, although perhaps that's to do with something else or is now incorrect.

2) More relevantly, while this may indeed be true, I don't see how this leads into 'a teenager only likes things because he sees his anger reflected in it'. While it might be a valid (real, actual) reason for liking something - the 'seeing one's emotions reflected in something else' part - I don't see why it is that this is the only reason why teenagers might like something.

[Tiara]

I don't mean to bother anyone but mental maturation lasts till you're dead

[Blaise Russel]

I thought one was s'posed to reach one's full mental development then? Like, the process that makes a child mentally different from a teenager from an adult ends then? Or something?