What’s the color of “rage” anyway? 
Puce.
What the hell does “worthless fraud” mean, then?
Candid, you keep saying that education wouldn’t help you understand art. What I want to know is, have you ever actually tried to educate yourself about art? If not, how do you know it wouldn’t “work” for you?
Well, let me give you a parallel example of ‘worthless fraud’ - professional wrestling. Particularly ten years ago, before they acknowledged the staging of the fights. Not every fan of pro wrestling at the time, believe or not, thought it was ‘real’.
So when I say abstract art is a worthless fraud, I am not implying that it’s fooling anyone. Now, in a later post, I did go on to assert that some people are fooling themselves based on art critic’s input, paying exorbitant amounts of money for works of ‘genius’. And I stand by that.
But the notion of ‘fooling’ has nothing to do with my first post.
As for the education angle - I didn’t say it wouldn’t help me understand art. I said it wouldn’t help me appreciate art. Let’s use the Icelandic analogy - I’m sure there are some interesting things out there written in Icelandic, but I really don’t need to pick up the language because people can say the same sorts of things in English, and I already get plenty of ideas I do appreciate in English. Why are the ones in Icelandic so special?
Lobsang, would you kindly ask for this thread to be closed, please?
Uh-huh. So shall I just add the word “fraud” to the list of words you clearly don’t understand the meaning of?
Just because something’s fake doesn’t mean that it if a successful fake. If you can’t grasp the distinction - well, it’s a pretty simple one.
to quote furt in the “Bush Mental Illness” thread:
Except for those who are literally mentally ill, nobody is so arrogant as to think they know everything or are always right. Everyone knows they are fallible; even a smug and arrogant person will allow there are some things he doesn’t know about.
The real test of one’s wisdom, grace and humility is exactly when you are faced with someone who disagrees with you on your deepest beliefs.
Try this: For purple mountains majesty. This has a very specific connotation, means something very definite and also has a deep significance for Americans who speak english (ignoring the generalizations about patriotism for a moment).
In spanish, it roughly translates to “Los montanas morado con majestad.”
Translated back into english, it means “purple coloured mountains with majesty.” This bears little resemblance to the intended idea, which in turn means nothing to a Spanish or Mexican person, because they don’t share that song as part of their cultural heritage. While “Vive le France!” or “God Save The Queen!” is just a catchphrase to an American, it is an important declaration of patriotism by a Frenchman or an Englishman.
are there words missing in this sentence? Or am I the only only one who doesn’t understand it?
And wether or not the fraud is succesful has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion. If you call all “abstract” (under whatever fucked up definition of that word you want to use) a “worthless fraud,” you are making a direct statement on both the intent of the artist and the gullibility of the audience. There is no way to use the term “fraud” that is not insulting to someone, and you used it in such a way as to insult everyone in this thread who has ever found anything of value in an abstract painting.
And then you started whining about how all the art snobs were being mean to you. :rolleyes:
Sorry - ‘purple mountains’ majesty’ doesn’t tug at the patriotic parts of my heartstrings.
‘if’ should have been ‘is’ … it’s a typo.
Whether the fraud was successful has everything to do with someone saying that I claimed “people were fooled” in my first post. I’ll explain it again for you. Someone can do something under false pretenses - trying to make people think they’re doing it for one reason, or with a certain methodology, when they are not. That would be a fraud. Its status as a fraud is not affected by how many people, if any, were fooled.
And Lobsang - I am sorry for my part of sidetracking your thread. Didn’t realize agreeing with you with a sarcastic quip in hand would lead to this run-on.
It’s no problem.
I have to be honest I haven’t read most of it now. I made my points earlier on and then it became just another thread.
Frankly, I’m speechless.
Not to bring up the OP or anything… 
… but CBS’s Sunday Morning had a segment about the 4 year old artist on. It was pretty cute. The interviewer kept asking what the artist meant by certain parts or why she did it. She wasn’t giving up any secrets if she had any.