|Zoot42 - 2008-03-15 |
What the fuck is this shit?!?!
|The Great Hippo - 2008-03-15 |
I'm kinda torn about this direction of art.
On one hand there's a cool tradition of leveling a cannon stuffed full of random and interesting shit, firing it at the reader, then telling them to figure it out for themselves.
On the other hand, why even bother? If artists are just going to throw incomprehensible rorschachs at us, what's stopping me from just saying fuck it and entertaining myself with random dice rolls or the patterns I make out of dead leaves floating on a lake?
Withholding my EVER-PRECIOUS VIDEO-BUMPING 5-STAR VOTE until someone can tell me how this is different than throwing some pebbles down and asking what the resulting pattern means.
You're criticizing art because it has the gall to insinuate that you could create art on your own?
The Great Hippo
If the artist's role is just to provide me with random patterns of data to interpret, we've reduced art to an elaborate game of word-association. What's the point of that? The only draw would be if the artist selected patterns that appealed to me.
I understand the very idea of art is bull shit but something about this idea throws me off. Then again, I'm completely gay for Burroughs, so maybe I'm just whining.
Art is, often, about finding beauty and showing it to the world. Maybe these random acts that are named art are trying to tell you that beauty doesn't have to be called art. The fact that you could, and should, see beauty in pebbles and leaves on a lake is the beauty that makes this art.
Or maybe I'm just drunk.
The Great Hippo
But to assume that this was the intent is to assume that there *was* an intent. You're interpreting the work on your own and drawing your own conclusions, which is more than fine; but it's not necessarily a conclusion the artist was leading you towards.
However, despite my previous transgressions, it's not my intent to fag up the always-delicious comment section of PoeTV with my brand of pseudo-intellectual douchery. So I'll just drop it.
Outside of any context, the clip's kind of funny. Three stars.
Reading an interview about this project with Glover helps a lot. The Onion AV Club has a pretty good one. In a general response to Hippo, sometimes it's just pretentious glop, sure. But other times, it's like a still photo, or painting, or a piece of music. It's about creating a tone, and a world in which that tone exists, for you to experience. If it's well done, you feel like you've experienced another world, or someone else's life.
The Great Hippo
Fair enough; the idea that an author is playing an elaborate game of word association with me that's DESIGNED to evoke certain feelings or sensations is far more tolerable then a completely random one. If that's what this is--and if that's what it accomplishes--consider this my spiritual five.
The Great Hippo * * * * *
HA HA NICE CLIP
|boner - 2008-03-15 |
My understanding is that Crispin Glover attends all the screenings of his movies, so you could ask him questions, and they're not on DVD or anything.
|themilkshark - 2008-03-16 |
I must see
|kingarthur - 2008-03-16 |
Well, at least I got to see a part of it now.
|Scynne - 2008-03-16 |
The important question isn't what it is, but "will it blend?"
|Caminante Nocturno - 2008-03-16 |
I see a talking fish saying this to me, and it makes more sense that way.
|revdrew - 2008-03-16 |
Just wanted to mention that I upped this particular clip to Youtube. I was just kind of randomly jumping around the movie before I watched it, landed on this and LOL'd. So, this is out there, and not that particularly hard to find.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|