Krylo |
04-25-2010 01:43 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mesden
then as long as he has a legitimate reason there's no point in being so upset about it.
|
You can't have a legitimate opinion on something without experiencing it.
It would be like me trying to tell you that having penises in your vagina sucks because obviously the act of penetration is superior to the act of penetrating. Maybe I could draw some comparisons on how like, any OTHER kind of penetration of the body is usually pretty terrible or something.
MAYBE if he actually played some of the more artistic games or did even some cursory research into the subject he could have a legitimate opinion.
He admits he has done neither, and so as it stands, he has none.
It's why I haven't, until now, bothered to actually respond to anything dealing with Ebert directly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike McC
(Post 1033915)
Lets say I walk up, and punch you in the face. I then declare it was performance art without a hint of insincerity. Is it Art?
|
Let's say something is critiqued by art critics, put in a museum, and taught to art students as art.
Does it make you an idiot for insisting it isn't? Yes.
Also it wouldn't surprise me if someone doing that was actually a piece of performance art that existed to explore the violent undertones of modern society and how the modern man represses his primal urges even in the face of obvious force.
|