# BBC news online, or is it the onion in disguise?! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 29, 2004, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685 "2004-09-29T17:19:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 26
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2004, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/501 "2004-10-05T22:51:54Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > And I feel none of this. Which is possibly why the “system” of it strikes me as false. See, this is the leap that communicates arrogance and insulting disrespect. For the most part, you’ve finally adapted your speech to be about you, as it should be, rather than about the art, as it was, but I point this out to show you where we’re coming from, as far as being insulted, etc. ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2004, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/502 "2004-10-05T22:53:34Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > Well, if expressing my opinion on the matter, admittedly in sarcastic terms, counts as dismissing the opposing opinions - that’s just too bad. Sigh. “The system is false” is not an expression of opinion. It’s an assertion of fact, BASED on your opinions. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2004, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/503 "2004-10-05T23:00:13Z")
> [@Pochacco](#): > > LOL … well, that’s what you do when you learn how to read, isn’t it? Not quite… learning to read is a powerful _practical_ communication aid. > [@](#): > > Seriously … because it allows for a more profound aesthetic experience. > > It allows you to go beyond just “well, that’s pretty”. See, I was with you until you said ‘profound’. Just because I appreciate paintings that have fine attention to small details doesn’t mean my experience is less profound, objectively speaking. > [@](#): > > It’s like watching a soccer game. I don’t know anything about soccer. To me it just looks like a bunch of guys running around kicking a ball. So I can admire it on a very shallow level (“Wow, those guys sure have a lot of endurance!”, or “yay, someone scored!”) but ultimately it’s pretty boring. It’s not quite the same. In watching a soccer game, one deduces the rules of the game during play. According to everybody else in this thread, all my experience in actually observing the artworks in question don’t count at all - either they’re lying, or this analogy’s wrong. Also… I know the rules of football, and basketball - and they are both pretty damn boring. I see the ‘grand strategies’ and interplay on the field of play - and it holds no interest or value for me whatever. I regard professional sports as a waste of time and money. > [@](#): > > Thanks. Thanks for sticking around. That’s pretty much what I do. Y’welcome. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2004, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/504 "2004-10-05T23:01:56Z")
> [@lissener](#): > > Sigh. “The system is false” is not an expression of opinion. It’s an assertion of fact, BASED on your opinions. > [@CandidGamera](#): > > …the “system” of it **strikes me as** false. Oh… I get it. Your username’s meant to be _ironic_. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2004, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/505 "2004-10-05T23:08:57Z")
Dude, you’re the one not paying attention. I acknowledged that your language had changed, although I’d guess your rather stick a fork in your eye than admit it. But still, the conclusion that “the system is false,” even if you preface the conclusion by acknowledging that it’s a conclusion that you came up with all on your own based on your own opinions, is still a pretty unforgivably arrogant conclusion. Opinions lead to conclusions. Those conclusions are, in fact, hypotheses: based on your understanding of the situation, it’s your hypothesis that the system is false. Since this hypothesis is so demonstrably false that there’s no real need to test it, to hold on to such a conclusion is insufferably arrogant, and indicates that you dismiss, out of hand, all the evidence to the contrary. Which of course is disrespectful of those who have shared that evidence with you. You are still calling us liars. It is your OPINION that we are liars, based on your OPINION that the system is “false.” Calling it an opinion doesn’t change the fact that it’s an arrogant and insulting–and demonstrabley false–opinion. ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2004, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/506 "2004-10-05T23:12:48Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > It’s not quite the same. In watching a soccer game, one deduces the rules of the game during play. According to everybody else in this thread, all my experience in actually observing the artworks in question don’t count at all - either they’re lying, or this analogy’s wrong. No; figuring out the rules of soccer from observation requires a certain level of attention and effort. Passively glancing at an abstract painting and insisting that it speak to you on one level when it’s communicating on an entirely different level is not the kind of attention and effort that would reveal the “rules.” All of us have figured out the “rules” of abstract art through observation more than anything else; education on the matter is really just hints for observing. You take soccer seriously enough to observe and learn; you do not take abstract art as seriously and so make no effort to observe and learn. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2004, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/507 "2004-10-05T23:49:37Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > Then you’re not very observant. > > Then again, any opinion couched in a “pronouncement from the art throne” phraseology would be disregarded on principle. The only “art throne” around here is in your misperception of your opponents. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2004, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/508 "2004-10-05T23:52:21Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > Not quite… learning to read is a powerful _practical_ communication aid. As is learning to “read” art. I design video games for a living. I’m not a professional artist, but I work and interact with them every day. If I couldn’t “read” a piece of art, I couldn’t do my job. Yes, it’s not a life skill on the order of learning how to balance your checkbook or drive, but it’s not just all fluff and nonsense either. > [@](#): > > See, I was with you until you said ‘profound’. Just because I appreciate paintings that have fine attention to small details doesn’t mean my experience is less profound, objectively speaking. It’s not that abstract painting are more profound. It’s that the skills required to appreciate an abstract painting will deepen the experience of any work of art. > [@](#): > > It’s not quite the same. In watching a soccer game, one deduces the rules of the game during play. According to everybody else in this thread, all my experience in actually observing the artworks in question don’t count at all - either they’re lying, or this analogy’s wrong. Soccer fans don’t develop in a vacuum. They play it as kids and talk about it with their buddies. The same is true of art. I’m a lousy artist and I’ve never had much in the way of formal art appreciation training. But I grew up with a familiy where one sister was a commercial artist and my father and another sister were interested in graphic design. So, for example, when I was 8 or 9 I used to lay around the house reading Communication Arts magazine. When I got out of college and got my first job as a programmer, it happened to be with a company that made photo retouching software. So I spent five years talking with artists about how they worked and learning to see images the way they saw them. It’s difficult to develop skills like this in a vacuum, particularly if you start off thinking that they don’t exist at all … . > [@](#): > > Also… I know the rules of football, and basketball - and they are both pretty damn boring. I see the ‘grand strategies’ and interplay on the field of play - and it holds no interest or value for me whatever. I regard professional sports as a waste of time and money. LOL … I think spectator sports are boring too. It was just an analogy to explain how understanding how to “read” a particular activity can increase your enjoyment of it, and even make what seems chaotic, ordered. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2004, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/509 "2004-10-06T00:00:13Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > > [@Miller](#): > > > > And if you don’t believe me, perhaps you can explain how you’ve managed to get so many people pissed at you, while Lobsang and This Year’s Model, both of whom have expressed sentiments similar to your own on the topic, have largely managed to post in this thread without angering anyone. > > I have an abrasive and sarcastic manner. Right, just like everyone’s been saying. It’s not your opinions that are pissing people off, it’s the fact that you can’t seem to express them without acting like an asshole. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2004, 12:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/510 "2004-10-06T12:54:13Z")
> [@lissener](#): > > But still, the conclusion that “the system is false,” even if you preface the conclusion by acknowledging that it’s a conclusion that you came up with all on your own based on your own opinions, is still a pretty unforgivably arrogant conclusion. Okay. If you say so. > [@](#): > > You are still calling us liars. It is your OPINION that we are liars, based on your OPINION that the system is “false.” No, it isn’t my opinion that you’re liars. Where are you getting this stuff? I seem to recall catching one poster in a lie when they conjectured wildly about me - but I think that’s it. > [@](#): > > Calling it an opinion doesn’t change the fact that it’s an arrogant and insulting–and demonstrabley false–opinion. 1. Opinions are not falsifiable. 2. If you choose to take insult, that’s okay by me. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2004, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/511 "2004-10-06T12:57:11Z")
> [@lissener](#): > > No; figuring out the rules of soccer from observation requires a certain level of attention and effort. Passively glancing at an abstract painting and insisting that it speak to you on one level when it’s communicating on an entirely different level is not the kind of attention and effort that would reveal the “rules.” > > All of us have figured out the “rules” of abstract art through observation more than anything else; education on the matter is really just hints for observing. > > You take soccer seriously enough to observe and learn; you do not take abstract art as seriously and so make no effort to observe and learn. Ohhhh, really? Is it possible, then, that I have studied these paintings visually and come to the conclusion that there’s nothing worthwhile there, just like I have with professional sports? This seems to be a reversal on the cascade of people telling me that having eyes and the capacity to observe many paintings weren’t enough. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2004, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/512 "2004-10-06T13:06:33Z")
> [@Pochacco](#): > > As is learning to “read” art. I design video games for a living. I’m not a professional artist, but I work and interact with them every day. If I couldn’t “read” a piece of art, I couldn’t do my job. That’s super. But learning to read is almost essential in this country. It’s a totally different level. > [@](#): > > It’s not that abstract painting are more profound. It’s that the skills required to appreciate an abstract painting will deepen the experience of any work of art. I wouldn’t characterize it as ‘deepening’, either. ‘Differentiating’, sure - if you know these so-called rules you can examine how well a painting follows them. > [@](#): > > It’s difficult to develop skills like this in a vacuum, particularly if you start off thinking that they don’t exist at all … . Well, you could always just make up some new set of visual rules for art, and follow those. It’d mean just as much to me. > [@](#): > > LOL … I think spectator sports are boring too. It was just an analogy to explain how understanding how to “read” a particular activity can increase your enjoyment of it, and even make what seems chaotic, ordered. See, here’s a funny thing you just made me think of - I’d enjoy professional sports just as much if they weren’t playing by the rules. (Which is to say - not at all) I watch the game - I see the rules - I have apathy. I watch a game where the rules are broken or subverted - I have apathy. It might as well be chaotic, from my perspective - because even though I see and comprehend the rules, they just don’t change the fact that the subject bores me. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2004, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/513 "2004-10-06T13:08:47Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Right, just like everyone’s been saying. It’s not your opinions that are pissing people off, it’s the fact that you can’t seem to express them without acting like an asshole. That’s just, like, your opinion, man. ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2004, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/514 "2004-10-06T13:35:40Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > Ohhhh, really? Is it possible, then, that I have studied these paintings visually and come to the conclusion that there’s nothing worthwhile there It’s not that you have come to the conclusion that there’s nothing worthwhile there _for you_, it’s that you have come to the conclusion that there’s nothing worthwhile there _for anyone_. You lack the capacity to appreciate abstract art, but instead of admitting that this is a fault within yourself, you keep insisting that this is a fault within everyone else _but_ you. Why do you persist in this? For 11 pages, we’ve tried to convince you that abstract art is not just random splotches of paint, and a good number of posters gave excellent reasons why this is so. And yet you insist on hanging on to your absurd ideas. Why? Here’s an idea: Just say this: “I guess there really is something to this abstract art thing, but I guess I just don’t get it.” What the fuck is so hard about that? ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2004, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/515 "2004-10-06T13:55:29Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > Here’s an idea: Just say this: “I guess there really is something to this abstract art thing, but I guess I just don’t get it.” What the fuck is so hard about that? Because that’s not what I believe. So why should I say it? You folks see something there for you, and I’ve repeatedly said that’s fine. As far as I’m concerned, it’s worthless and a good portion of it is equivalent to an elephant slapping paint on a canvas. ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2004, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/516 "2004-10-06T15:12:23Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > Because that’s not what I believe. So why should I say it? Which part don’t you believe? That there’s not something to abstract art, or that you don’t get it? ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2004, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/517 "2004-10-06T15:24:06Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > Which part don’t you believe? That there’s not something to abstract art, or that you don’t get it? I don’t believe there is an objective ‘something’ to abstract art. ---
**Author:** ![fessie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c37758/32.png) [@fessie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fessie)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2004, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/518 "2004-10-06T15:34:51Z")
We have explained to you repeatedly that there are principles of visual communication at work in “abstract” art which are the same principles in “realistic” art, advertising, movies, journalism - any form of visual communication. And that aesthetics is a way of expanding your understanding of life. You keep telling us we’re wrong. That it doesn’t exist. That the millions of dollars spent every year on visual communication via any medium is just - what? - a series of random choices? People, businesses are wasting that kind of money on nothing? What’s more interesting is your decision to isolate yourself with your statements and how that has created your huge need for attention. Rather like the child who doesn’t get picked for the team, and then compensates by shouting loudly that it’s a dumb sport anyway. Regardless of your intractability, I have thoroughly enjoyed the responses people have given you. One of the better discussions of art I’ve seen here. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2004, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/519 "2004-10-06T15:42:14Z")
> [@fessie](#): > > What’s more interesting is your decision to isolate yourself with your statements and how that has created your huge need for attention. Rather like the child who doesn’t get picked for the team, and then compensates by shouting loudly that it’s a dumb sport anyway. Honestly, not doing it for the attention. Really. If you want to ignore me and go away - that will save me precious seconds of response-time, and make me happy. Of course, one could counter, I could just stop responding - but that’s just not in my character. ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2004, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685/520 "2004-10-06T15:43:34Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > I don’t believe there is an objective ‘something’ to abstract art. I would agree with you if your emphasis is on the word “objective.” But then is there an objective anything about any art? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685.md?page=25) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bbc-news-online-or-is-it-the-onion-in-disguise/266685.md?page=27)