truth bombs

does the regular practice of soccer & cricket make one a jock

the word certainly contains those letters

lockjaw?

on the bright side, everyone who can remember when men wore suits and ties and hats to work will be dead in 20+ years. and people being 20 forever will just be normal. the urgency to get a lot done at an early age is gone now. you don't have to get married and have kids when you are 20 or EVER really! the urgency to grow up is gone. and the urgency to grow up and do grown up stuff is also gone when you realize that you have 70 years of netflix watching ahead of you. people live too long now. and it will probably get worse. in the near future people will probably be pushing 120 without breaking a sweat. which is why you shouldn't vaccinate. replacing fellini and magical realism with harry potter and the hunger games just a natural outcome of a longer life-span and a lack of responsibilities. (i get called "kid" ALL the time by people older than me. they think i'm 15. you aren't an adult anymore unless you are 80.)

― scott seward, Monday, September 15, 2014

i don't know what that's from but are you serious? is that serious? "replacing fellini and magical realism with harry potter and the hunger games" lol

nah I get his point: all gods dead, all faiths in mankind shaken, and so on.

all dads old

my god does this mean that there might have been previous truth bombs that were neither objectively universally true nor actual viable explosive devices SENATOR I DEMAND THE FLOOR

*is engulfed in flames and pummeled by shrapnel* thanks truth

sorry, I'm so sorry, it was what the people wanted

w/e

can totally imagine a scorched and brutalised mattp signing off with a 'w/e'

it's from the quid/ag NYT thread fwiw in response to the AO Scott 'kids these days' piece

nah I get his point: all gods dead, all faiths in mankind shaken, and so on.

― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, September 15, 2014 6:19 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

all dads old

― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Monday, September 15, 2014 6:22 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

(ftr 'all dads old' is intended as a continuation of your line here not a mockery of it--extended adolescence = our stern authority figures are older too)

Time was, we hated it when the boss hovered round our cubicles. Today, the boss will literally drive his hoveround around your cubicle, and the electric motor is loud.

worst (meaning least true) "truth bomb" in this thread so far.

more like truth bum

you guys do realize that i just make stuff up, right? still, not my best work. i had two separate conversations the other day and they are both still in my head and that's where that came from. one about the people not growing up thing a la the nyt article and another one about how t.v. and pop fiction has kinda taken the place of uh "higher" art in a lot of places and that the enthusiasms of brainy people have changed in my lifetime because of....i don't know what. (i mean, MY enthusiasms have changed too. i read sc-fi and watch netflix t.v. and the criterion collection on my hulu has cobwebs on it...)

also, yeah, you should vaccinate.

there are also more articulate truths on the nyt thread if you scroll down...not by me.

I don't follow tv or pop fiction because my tastes are very refined. Strictly Fellini for me.

fellini is the way to go. i actually watched a criterion thing the other night but i cheated cuz it was les blank footage of hippie festival with hard psych rock score. my comfort zone.

i can't read that thread, so much haterade

it's more the cultural relativism that paints everything the same boring grey that i dislike, like i can read proust and still watch bob's burgers or whatever (i don't think this is remarkable in any way), one doesn't preclude the other. i feel like an idiot even typing this out.

i think a lot of people have given up the french cookies and just go for the burgers. need some hard proust-reading data to back that up though. not people HERE obviously. you are all special.

i'm an anecdotal fool though. and i certainly know lots of people who read. culturally though, it certainly seems like 24/7 pop/fantasy fic/marvel/television/etc. the fine arts/lit fic/etc seem less of a force now than at any point in my lifetime. maybe i'm just morbid though.

hard proust-reading data, sounds sexy

*emails don delillo*

do people still go to the ballet?

UUUUUUUUUUUUGH

Why are you guys trying to judge the high arts consumption of the people of 2014 with the high arts markers of 1914? How is going to the ballet a measure of interest in "high art" in the 21st century?

did anybody itt watch amarcord lately, struggling to see expanses of sophistication between it & bob's burgers

Also people 100 years ago were just as dumb and interested in """"""low art""""" as they are today. Yellow tabloid journalism, comic books, penny dreadfuls, music halls, I shouldn't even have to type this shit out.

i just think that ALL kinds of people are more into low art now than...uh...not-low art. people who would have been reading proust in earlier decades are watching the walking dead instead. and not reading proust. that's all. no biggie.

high art has def lost some cultural cache, being a snob is so out

things have changed. that's all. the people keeping those trad art forms alive aren't doing it anymore. if you are a local poet, you read to other local poets. it's all niche now. hobby. message boards...(poetry was actually cool in the 80's. i totally remember that...but the good wife kinda better than most local poetry...)

But what I'm saying is why should traditional art forms be the only things considered "high art"? If that's the case, then of course high art is dying out, because it's tied directly to old art that doesn't have meaning in modern life.

I guess the snobbishness of high art is what is dooming it. Not being open to new forms or more popular/populist forms. Maintaining barriers to entry. Going to ballets is expensive.

i guess it really doesn't speak to people like it used to. fancy art was embraced to some degree by all kinds of people in the 50s/60s/70s. stravinsky was a famous dude. on the other hand, i went to MoMa this year and it was standing-room only in that place. the old favorites still pack them in. and a very diverse bunch it was too.

I guess the snobbishness of high art is what is dooming it. Not being open to new forms or more popular/populist forms. Maintaining barriers to entry. Going to ballets is expensive.

― Immediate Follower (NA), Wednesday, September 17, 2014 10:33 AM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I know right

ballets may be expensive but i can think of a bunch of other events with high art pretentions or even honest-to-god masterpieceness that cost less than a month's netflix subscription to attend in my podunk town. this argument that "low art" is somehow more vibrant or alive is such bullshit, it's subject to the same rules of production and the same cultures of consensus just located among people with different sets of neuroses.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzz

lol

NA keeping the truth bomb thread righteous with his prescient takedowns of high art.

Sorry if I fucked up the thread with truth bombs like "dude everyone knows you're supposed to pound a 'dew when you eat at taco bell. its like white wine and fish."

the high arts markers of 1914

blink 1892

i see your point about high, old, dead art forms but i don't think it's that simple is all. i see substantial barriers to entry for supposedly lower forms like tv; for instance, it's cheaper for me to go to a modern dance performance than it is to watch a single ep of breaking bad. i may be able to score it for free but i have to do more and less enjoyable mental work than i would if i went to the performance, plus constantly be on top of whatever tech is required and that shit breaks i mean "improves" all the time. there is definitely a distinction that exists between high culture art and low culture art but it is nearly as old as high culture art itself is and at this point in time does not very cleanly break along class lines. i mean if you want to talk about relevant aesthetic binaries i think one that is less of a red herring here is consumptive vs participatory art. xp

i think a really fucked up idea is that consumption is inherently more class-authentic and should be respected or pandered to as such.

Most of the class barriers on art today are soft barriers that are self-policed/enforced by people without even realizing it. It's all basically like Chelsea art galleries -- you can go in free, but will you feel comfortable doing so/will you feel like it's your place to do so/does it seem to you like "your kind of thing" based on how you've been cast by ideology? TV watching choices are still heavily class influenced too, it's just that the bourgeois/high-class TV today takes pains to make itself not seem stuffy or snobby.

i went to MoMa this year and it was standing-room only in that place.

yeah that's why i never go in the galleries any more -- too crowded (I'm in the basement watching '50s pulp movies).

lex sure "annoys" a lot of straight white dudes

― mattresslessness, 9 minutes ago