Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|4780|London, England

Larssen wrote:

uziq wrote:

this is of course true, just as 'great man' history is what is popular despite having many sustained attacks from within academic history.

also you can't call people 'amateurs' and then drop high-school arts trivia about goya.
I don't know what high school you went to but I'd be a little worried if goya is part of the curriculum. You have this weirdly elitist view of well, anything really, by which the more obscure and more revered in narrow circles of academia the better it is, or something. Are you going to quote that misanthropic poet from the early 1900s again?
You didn't pick up that he's a hipster? Anything popular is bad by default.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+589|3142
Get em Larssen
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
Larssen
Member
+94|1310
I suppose uziq's preference is to rubens' version of saturn eating his son instead of that plebeian goya and his disregard for more classical principles.

Of course I would appreciate his love for the superiority of flemish artists centuries earlier but how many people are even aware of goya outside of art history and history circles, come on now.

Last edited by Larssen (2020-05-08 12:53:01)

uziq
Member
+475|2874

Jay wrote:

Larssen wrote:

uziq wrote:

this is of course true, just as 'great man' history is what is popular despite having many sustained attacks from within academic history.

also you can't call people 'amateurs' and then drop high-school arts trivia about goya.
I don't know what high school you went to but I'd be a little worried if goya is part of the curriculum. You have this weirdly elitist view of well, anything really, by which the more obscure and more revered in narrow circles of academia the better it is, or something. Are you going to quote that misanthropic poet from the early 1900s again?
You didn't pick up that he's a hipster? Anything popular is bad by default.
that’s not what i mean at all. also who is ‘hipster’ about goya, i mean come on ffs.

i can’t remember which misanthropic poet i quoted. there’s a lot from that period. but none of the modernists are ‘niche and obscure’. they are the most famous poets of the 20th century.

i mean every artist when they are name dropped have some trivia. did you know he painted on the walls? etc etc. it’s just a weird thing to drop in there when you’re accusing everyone of being ‘amateurs’. it’s not exactly art history. it’s like talking about van gogh’s ear or something. i was paying back the kindness to your own sweeping elitist tone, dumbazz.

Last edited by uziq (2020-05-08 13:15:03)

uziq
Member
+475|2874

Larssen wrote:

Of course I would appreciate his love for the superiority of flemish artists centuries earlier but how many people are even aware of goya outside of art history and history circles, come on now.
do you really think goya is niche? he’s like one of the top 10 artists from that entire period. i think you vastly underestimate general knowledge.
Larssen
Member
+94|1310
It was a random little fact that entered my brain as I was writing and I know that he's accessible enough that at least some people here must know of him. It may make reading about the period more inviting.

Also yes I do question general knowledge about the 18th-19th centuries or anything history really let alone specific artists because a. most high school history has it reduced to a few pages, if that, mostly covering national bs, b. people generally do not give much of a fuck. Goya at least still gets some exposure because he's on the tourist museum hit list for people who go to madrid and is indeed a 'famous artist from the period'. Though I'd be pretty much in fucking awe if you had a ready top ten list of every century or artistic period.

I mean I'm sure the majority of the english think francis bacon is a restaurant somewhere. You expect them to know goya?

Last edited by Larssen (2020-05-08 13:18:49)

uziq
Member
+475|2874
the majority of english people would actually confuse francis bacon for the major english historical personage. but any english person who has been to our national gallery would know who the artist bacon is, yes.

goya is without question one of the most famous spanish artists of all time. i can’t think of many who are as well known. el greco? velasquez? that’s about it. picasso is associated more with paris/france, ditto dali. i would not expect people to identify them with ‘spanish painting’. but everyone knows the black paintings and the story behind them. they are part of popular culture. they are used and reposted everywhere. they are literally some of the most ubiquitous images in all of european art history.

you’re on unsteady ground here. be careful larssen! you’ve already tried to insult me for my ‘obscure’ tastes in early 1900s poetry, despite the best known names in all of modern poetry deriving from that period/school, and hence being the most well known to the general public. t s eliot and robert frost are not ‘hipster and obscure’. they are taught to high school students.

Last edited by uziq (2020-05-08 13:30:00)

Larssen
Member
+94|1310
I would actually expect people to name picasso and dali and it wouldn't have been out of place at all. No I don't think 'anyone would know the black and white paintings and the history behind them'. Why would they? What high school teacher anywhere but in spain would want to teach his kids about romanticism in art, focusing on a spanish painter? Even if these are staples of european art history - there are so many considering how long the history is. Does everyone know the major renaissance sculptors by name? Or even figures whose ideas and writing have remained relevant through time like machiavelli? My experience tells me most people simply think of the card or board game.

Last edited by Larssen (2020-05-08 13:33:47)

uziq
Member
+475|2874
i mean you're appealing to such a nebulous concept of 'most people' and 'the average person' that it's pointless to argue against. whatever i take to be the mean you're going to cite some football fan or scaffolder or something. are they 'average'? who has a 'representative' level of education in art history? but it's safe to say that most people would recognise goya's work (if not necessarily the black paintings, then the aquatints/etchings at least, which were widely circulated and re-printed everywhere).

e.g. jay's favourite agon, the sleep of reason.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f5/Museo_del_Prado_-_Goya_-_Caprichos_-_No._43_-_El_sue%C3%B1o_de_la_razon_produce_monstruos.jpg/300px-Museo_del_Prado_-_Goya_-_Caprichos_-_No._43_-_El_sue%C3%B1o_de_la_razon_produce_monstruos.jpg
Larssen
Member
+94|1310
With most people I literally mean most people. A tiny minority of kids still follows classical educational principles and are usually forced to do so. How many people are either interested in art history or made to read through it? The idea that this is a staple in people's education or should be part of the public conscience is antiquated. I am certain you will find many very well educated people who have no idea about any of this because, well, it's not at all required or cared for as much as it was some 50-60 years ago.

And honestly this isn't an indictment, it's a positive, but nonetheless true.

Last edited by Larssen (2020-05-08 13:39:56)

uziq
Member
+475|2874
your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter
Larssen
Member
+94|1310
They were pointless hoops serving only to entrench and differentiate a landed elite from their commoner counterparts. In a way core to their identity formation as much as nationally approved histories serve to imbue a sense of community on the youngsters as soon as possible.

Personally I had to start reading the Aeneid and Odyssey in latin and greek when I was far too young and I resent the fact that I had to do so. Not unexpectedly I sucked and was thankfully allowed to drop that shit soon enough.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,998|6194|USA

Jay wrote:

coke wrote:

So much History Channel...
All the stuff you said about the Sherman is debunked rubbish from coffee table books and shite TV. The "slogging it out in attrition battles" thing is a tactical issue vs doctirnal issue, the whole point Shermans supported infantry tank destroyers fight the tanks...
Check the survival rates of Sherman crews and tanks and how quickly they would be back in action after taking hits compared to virtually anything else.
Again we run into the "im good at maths, but post bullshit numbers" problem 10,000s of deaths because the Sherman really???

Market Garden really wasn't anything to do with V2's either...
Read Death Traps
I didn't have time earlier but I was about to ask you if you read that. That's like the default take fresh WW2 enthusiasts have on the tank.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|4780|London, England

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Jay wrote:

coke wrote:

So much History Channel...
All the stuff you said about the Sherman is debunked rubbish from coffee table books and shite TV. The "slogging it out in attrition battles" thing is a tactical issue vs doctirnal issue, the whole point Shermans supported infantry tank destroyers fight the tanks...
Check the survival rates of Sherman crews and tanks and how quickly they would be back in action after taking hits compared to virtually anything else.
Again we run into the "im good at maths, but post bullshit numbers" problem 10,000s of deaths because the Sherman really???

Market Garden really wasn't anything to do with V2's either...
Read Death Traps
I didn't have time earlier but I was about to ask you if you read that. That's like the default take fresh WW2 enthusiasts have on the tank.
It's actually probably the last WWII book that I've read. I read it after watching Fury and saw that they used it as source material for the movie.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Larssen
Member
+94|1310
but fury is such a shit film tho, entertaining, but shit
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|4780|London, England

Larssen wrote:

but fury is such a shit film tho, entertaining, but shit
It was entertaining
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
uziq
Member
+475|2874

Larssen wrote:

They were pointless hoops serving only to entrench and differentiate a landed elite from their commoner counterparts. In a way core to their identity formation as much as nationally approved histories serve to imbue a sense of community on the youngsters as soon as possible.

Personally I had to start reading the Aeneid and Odyssey in latin and greek when I was far too young and I resent the fact that I had to do so. Not unexpectedly I sucked and was thankfully allowed to drop that shit soon enough.
neat theory but has nothing whatsoever to do with the very public appreciation of art and art education since ca. 1880.

i sincerely pity you or anyone else who thinks art is there as 'pointless hoops' and 'namedropping' markers. did you even read homer? look at those paintings? there's a bit more to it than memorizing the odd fact(oid) here and there to impress people.

Last edited by uziq (2020-05-08 14:50:33)

SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+589|3142
Men are allowed to appreciate art but only to a certain degree. Unless you are an artist yourself, you can't be an into art too much without being gay. Complete women's hobby.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
uziq
Member
+475|2874
you build toy robots in your spare time. stop going on about manliness. that's a eunuch's hobby.
Pochsy
Artifice of Eternity
+702|4965|Toronto
Question: if manliness is most noticeable for the unshakable confidence and dedication a man has, is committing to a pursuit like art despite its perceived weakness not alfa as fuck? Kinda like men in pink shirts is the most peacock fuck-you possible?
The shape of an eye in front of the ocean, digging for stones and throwing them against its window pane. Take it down dreamer, take it down deep. - Other Families
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|4780|London, England

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Men are allowed to appreciate art but only to a certain degree. Unless you are an artist yourself, you can't be an into art too much without being gay. Complete women's hobby.
or looking to launder money
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|4780|London, England

Pochsy wrote:

Question: if manliness is most noticeable for the unshakable confidence and dedication a man has, is committing to a pursuit like art despite its perceived weakness not alfa as fuck? Kinda like men in pink shirts is the most peacock fuck-you possible?
I prefer lavender
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Pochsy
Artifice of Eternity
+702|4965|Toronto
Also, n.b. I am super embarrassed I wrote alfa and not alpha.
The shape of an eye in front of the ocean, digging for stones and throwing them against its window pane. Take it down dreamer, take it down deep. - Other Families
Larssen
Member
+94|1310

uziq wrote:

Larssen wrote:

They were pointless hoops serving only to entrench and differentiate a landed elite from their commoner counterparts. In a way core to their identity formation as much as nationally approved histories serve to imbue a sense of community on the youngsters as soon as possible.

Personally I had to start reading the Aeneid and Odyssey in latin and greek when I was far too young and I resent the fact that I had to do so. Not unexpectedly I sucked and was thankfully allowed to drop that shit soon enough.
neat theory but has nothing whatsoever to do with the very public appreciation of art and art education since ca. 1880.

i sincerely pity you or anyone else who thinks art is there as 'pointless hoops' and 'namedropping' markers. did you even read homer? look at those paintings? there's a bit more to it than memorizing the odd fact(oid) here and there to impress people.
Yes I do think compulsory art education for children specifically in classics and its history is a pretty pointless hoop. If it's part of general history to step into art and art movements for a bit, sure. But making it a focal point? I pity your insistence on its inclusion.

The odyssey is homer, uziq. If it were up to me I'd preferred to have learned more about greek society at the time rather than primarily being focused on translating its epic poems. All that time untangling mythos and the stories of deities and only once I entered uni did I even read about figures like solon or really dive into pericles. Seems to me that 1. emphasis was on the wrong stuff, 2. I wanted more leeway to choose my own path to align with my interests.

Last edited by Larssen (2020-05-08 15:53:27)

uziq
Member
+475|2874
i mean did you even read it, as in, did you take anything from the text other than 'this is a pointless hoop jumping exercise'. not mistaking or forgetting the author of the odyssey. lmao.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2022 Jeff Minard