LOTR based bands

[LuminousAether]

LXG may be a crappy movie, I wouldn't know as I haven't seen it yet... but the graphic novel it is based off of is absolutely fantastic. Alan Moore is one of the best authors today, which is even more amazing since he is purely a comic book author.

Everyone should read his masterpiece From Hell, another mediocre movie but amazing graphic novel. I can tell you right now that there was no way in Hell they could have made an awesome movie from that graphic novel, it was impossible. All the history would have made it a 10 hour affair, easily.

 

[Stormwatch]

if that is creative or art- well then I can draw a stick figure- and call it a piece of art. .

You mean like the earliest art by humans? The cave paintings? That's not my opinion - it's an accepted fact that those stick figures are early ART.

 

[speed]

In the context of the stone ages it is art( the stick figure)- in the 21st century it is crap.

I'd like to believe your rather fantastic delineation of the world- but it just doesnt ring true. Art should be more than that what is created- it must have a higher value. I do not think I am alone in this assumption- many a writer from Plato to Kant( many volumes of works, and art have been dedicated to Aesthetics) , have long thought that art must serve some purpose- other than making money, or the mere act of creation of a wholly derivative form of art etc.

I suppose I will never convince you of my argument- or the folly of your argument. yet, I want to remind you of the many things you have created over your life- are they art? Do they show creativity and talent, purpose, form etc? Or, are these creative works nothing more than works that satisfy you, and you alone- works that no one else would find any redeeming value in? Art cannot include everything-or it loses any actual meaning it may still have.

 

[no country for old wainds]

Listen to the Blind Guardian song "Lord of the Rings." I dare you not to laugh.

Yes, that is quite ticklish....

 

[skeptik]

Sure, it is if you don't understand what the song is about. Outsiders tend to laugh at things they wouldn't if they understood it or at least appreciated it for its purpose. I find that I've never laughed listenening to that song.

 

[speed]

I'll give some credit to Blind Guardian - their albums really are the best of the tolkein inspired songs- they go all out- with the brief story's or acoustic songs etc.all telling the Tolkein story.

 

[Stormwatch]

In the context of the stone ages it is art( the stick figure)- in the 21st century it is crap.

I'd like to believe your rather fantastic delineation of the world- but it just doesnt ring true. Art should be more than that what is created- it must have a higher value. I do not think I am alone in this assumption- many a writer from Plato to Kant( many volumes of works, and art have been dedicated to Aesthetics) , have long thought that art must serve some purpose- other than making money, or the mere act of creation of a wholly derivative form of art etc.

I suppose I will never convince you of my argument- or the folly of your argument. yet, I want to remind you of the many things you have created over your life- are they art? Do they show creativity and talent, purpose, form etc? Or, are these creative works nothing more than works that satisfy you, and you alone- works that no one else would find any redeeming value in? Art cannot include everything-or it loses any actual meaning it may still have.

The POINT of art is: people's enjoyment - be it their own in creating it, or other's, in the pleasure they derive from it.
You want to remind me of things I've created? Why, do you remember them? If you don't know what I've created how can you assume no one else found any redeeming value in them?
What's the big fuckin deal with "The meaning of art" anyway? You writing a doctorate on it and want us to do all your work for you?
I can't be arsed discussing this anymore, but that shouldn't bother you too much since you believe my opinion is "folly", instead of understanding that an opinion on something as abstract as this can never be proven right or wrong. It's all subjective.

 

[FrostGiant]

I know exactly what art is. But I won't tell you cuz my definition will be different. You make the call for yourself. And if you don't see it as art, well, that doesn't mean it isn't. Don't make such a big deal over it.

 

[speed]

I totally agree TakinthemusicBack- any opinion on art is subjective- including yours. So , all the crap we both have written about the subject presents only our personal subjective views.

Your idea of The POINT of art is: people's enjoyment - be it their own in creating it, or other's, in the pleasure they derive from it. - is your opinion, and totally subjective and thus holds no higher value than my ramblings. So, maybe we are both right, art is both somethind done for peoples enjoyment in creating it and the pleasure they seek for it, and a creation of some higher value etc.

 

[machine]

In the context of the stone ages it is art( the stick figure)- in the 21st century it is crap.

Context is the faith of all art....

the stick figures as portrayed in Blair Witch were paramount to the story.... just an example....

There are nearly 5 billion people in the world... you put a paper clip in a dog turd and someone will believe it's the greateast thing since the Mona Lisa.

 

[skeptik]

speed, so you're saying your favorite song is art, but a song you don't like is not art? Hmm, I don't get that part...that's one thing that keeps me from agreeing with you.

 

[speed]

Could you please clarify Dodensgrav? I dont think i ever said art was based on personal taste( i may have though- I do ramble on) I just have always thought art must serve some purpose- any purpose, and this purpose must be understood by other people. An artist that creates a piece of work that only he can understand, is not a piece of art in my opinion( and this is subjective- so who cares).

 

[skeptik]

"In the context of the stone ages it is art( the stick figure)- in the 21st century it is crap."

Well, from this statement is where I interpreted my observation. Based on this you seem to say that the stick figure is crap now, therefore it's not art (to you). However, to a scientist or artist they may see it as art because they get joy from it. From other statements you seemed to say that if one cannot pull anything from a subject personally, then it is not art. That is what I understood, and that's what I don't agree with.

 

[Stormwatch]

I totally agree TakinthemusicBack- any opinion on art is subjective- including yours. So , all the crap we both have written about the subject presents only our personal subjective views.

Your idea of The POINT of art is: people's enjoyment - be it their own in creating it, or other's, in the pleasure they derive from it. - is your opinion, and totally subjective and thus holds no higher value than my ramblings. So, maybe we are both right, art is both somethind done for peoples enjoyment in creating it and the pleasure they seek for it, and a creation of some higher value etc.

Agreed. At last!!

 

[speed]

Well Dodensgrav- you make a good point- it is obvious that a creator of a logical philosophy I am not. But a creator of stick figures I most certaintly am.

 

[skeptik]

Well Dodensgrav- you make a good point- it is obvious that a creator of a logical philosophy I am not. But a creator of stick figures I most certaintly am.

Or as some would say, a creator of art.