Yeah, this is just another thing you can count on a significant number of people on the Dope to just be too fucking stupid to accurately appraise. Just like Slate will always write something contrarian, the Dope will always profess how sports are dumb, popular things are bad, and beautiful people are ugly. The regularity is only matched by the posters who regularly chime in about how Black people are stupid.
But again, drooling moron? If anything, it’s more a matter of him saying things without a filter.
The supposed full quote is:
He is talking about novels, specifically in relation to the book he wrote. He also is espousing a believe that experience is more useful to him them reading novels about people. I don’t agree necessarily, but the guy was not talking about all books or complaining because they are too hard and wordy to read. Again, not my opinion, but the selective editing and missing context really speaks volumes about the people reprinting the quote.
Depends on how big the Venn diagram is. Why is calling Kanye a genius a problem? It doesn’t lessen Beethoven’s accomplishments at all. Besides, what in your opinion makes Beethoven so great that easily one of the most talented musicians working today has no chance of comparing ever.
I’m not saying he’s a moron. Or even that he’s a terrible musician, if you like that sort of thing. But musical genius? He is to the 21st century what Mozart was to the 18th? If that’s the case…
Why should a person here in the 21st century care how big Mozart was in the 18th century? It matters if you can trace his influence to something that has impact today, but just being great a long time ago should not confer some extra special significance in my mind. I am not saying Mozart or Shakespeare or anyone else isn’t great or influential, just that I don’t think being a genius then precludes someone from being considered a genius now. I am quite sure they both had their detractors in their time.
They shouldn’t, but musical geniuses (genii?) of the past set the precedent. If those schmucks in Vienna got The Magic Flute and I get 'Imma real happy for ya" then I’m off to start my own planet - with blackjack, hookers and classical music!
I’m torn. On the one hand, anyone reacting with outrage to this Vogue cover seems to playing right into Kim & Kanye’s hands. Much like the weirdly pedophiliac-come-hither “performance” of Miley Cyrus at the VMAs, it is completely and utterly calculated to keep them in the public eye. (I know I’m not telling anyone here anything new).
On the other hand, I (as someone whose one and only thread here so far was outrage about a Final Jeopardy answer) really, really want to be outraged. As Merneith notes in post 36, Anna Wintour has spent her life building Vogue up to be the paragon and final arbiter of high fashion, if not taste.
I watched a documentary on her on Netflix and came away from it respecting what she has wrought. Now, it really does seem that the bottom line is generating controversy and selling the mag. I’m fairly sure most people here could care less about Vogue and what it represents. I respect that. Around the world, though, it really does matter to a lot of fairly high-end people and to ignore that would be, in my view, disrespectful as well.
Bottom line - these two do not belong on the cover of Vogue.
What is the argument for why Tina Fey or Lena Dunham or Melania Trump deserve the cover, but they don’t? What has Melania Trump besides marry a disgusting, awful rich guy? What are Lena Dunham’s fashion contributions? She is known for dressing poorly and looking worse. When was the last time you heard anyone say they want to dress like Tina Fey (who is generally great FWIW).
How is putting Kim on the cover worse than putting any other marginally accomplished actress on the cover (eg. Blake Lively, Kate Bosworth, Keira Knightly, etc.)?
By what measure? Why is Beethoven better than the Beatles, and what makes you think the environment then is similar enough to the environment now to make a valid comparison. The point being that we have no idea of all the stupid things past geniuses said or did because no one followed them around with cameras and dissected every statement they made.
I just don’t understand how one can make the argument that you are making. Mostly just because there is no real reason to compare people in such different eras. Kanye is a musical genius not because his music is better than Bach’s, but because he is better than almost every other person currently making music. It’s like saying a guy like wolfram is not a genius because he didn’t accomplish as much as Euclid or Newton.
Why not? They’re people working in the same field. The man himself seems to want the comparison. If one applies the standard of genius to oneself then why not be compared to others who nobody would doubt were geniuses? It is, shall we say, an open question in the case of Mr. West. IMO he’s not even in the top 100 of those making music today, in 100 years others I think will be remembered for their craft while he fades into obscurity - YMMV. Vogue can do what they like to cater to their audience. That said there’s no need to put him into the opposite end of complete moron either if one doesn’t consider him the greatest musician alive.
Also the fact that he’s aware of cameras being on him would lead a genius to deduce he should be careful with less than genius-like statements. I don’t hold it against him, though - he’s a musician, not a public speaker.
But that’s not the opinion of those in the music industry, as well as critics. I’m sure there were plenty of folks who were’t all that found of Beethoven or the Beatles (one can’t say that the Beatles won’t be remembered). Why do people not tend to bat too much of an eye when someone considers, say, Jimi Hendrix a musical genius?
Yes, but keeping fame is not as hard as getting it in the first place. And she’s still not actually famous for doing anything. At best, she’s just good at being famous.
I don’t get the furor, either, but I do understand why people think she is not a high-class celebrity. And I do know that Kanye says a lot of stupid things–to the point that he got pilloried for it on South Park. If you believe Vogue is high-class, then I can see being disappointed in their selection.
Time will tell whether his contemporary popular success (grammies, etc) will translate into lasting impact like musical geniuses of the past. Although most of them didn’t need to bang on about how much of a genius they were and let the work speak for itself. See Jimi’s quote; “I know a whole lot of musicians, artists out there who hears the compliments and thinks “wow, I must have been really great” and so they get fat and satisfied and they get lost and forget about their actual talent and start living in another world.”
Kim Kardashian is a marginally accomplished actress? What productions has she been in? Is she a member of SAG? What plays/movies/television shows has she acted in? Has she ever memorized even a single line?
Tina Fey. I don’t have a lot to say about her. As you say, she is great. The only thing I can say is that Vogue is not just about how people dress. It is about fashion, with all its quirks and oddities. Using someone who is fairly well-renowned for her creative success, forged pretty much against the prevailing currents of her industry, seems to me to dovetail at least somewhat with what Vogue (and Anna Wintour) stands for.
Lena Dunham did not belong on the cover IMHO. Another example of my point.
Melania Trump? Are you effin’ kiddin’ me? She represents, I would wager, at least half of Vogue’s intended audience. Allow me to introduce you to this thing we like to refer to as “reality”.
Which brings me to my final point. In my post I was addressing the OP. Allow me to recommend that you do the same, and quit all this pathetic, impotently flailing side bullshit.
But on the hand, Kanye keeps talking about how much of a genius he is and has arguably done his best work on his last two albums. His ego may actually lead to higher heights than otherwise (mostly because his ego also makes him into a super perfectionist, spending thousands of hours on the production of each song).
You’re not helping your case. The added context doesn’t change the meaning. Books and novels are not synonymous. If he meant novels in the second usages, he should have said it.
How can anyone read that quote and not think Kayne is doing his best *Idiocracy *impression. “Books are hard. they have WORDS.” And what does “I would never want a book’s autograph” even mean? Books can’t sign! Use your words, Kayne! You’re supposed to be a genius!
In case you get defensive, I am not judging his musical talents. I don’t have an opinion at all. I don’t even care if he’s on the cover of Vogue. I’m judging his public persona. If it’s all an act, that doesn’t make it better.
By all accounts that I’ve heard, contrasting Kanye West’s buffonish persona with Mozart is pretty silly to begin with. In addition, you didn’t actually quote any of West’s works. We all know what he said at the award show, but that’s not what he’s respected for. He’s widely recognized as one of the best producers working today. No one here is defending him for anything else, especially not the admittedly stupid things he’s said.
Speaking only about Kanye’s musical talents: there are a fuckload of people who hate rap or hip hop of any kind and absolutely refuse to actually listen to counterarguments or to even try to understand the genre(s). It’s strange and unfamiliar in how it sounds, slang used, cultural references that aren’t theirs, etc. It’s incredibly aggravating because it’s such an arrogant attitude and willful ignorance.* Since they don’t “get” it, obviously it has no value whatsoever.
(And please, don’t skip over the actual points just to say that not all white people blahblah, or whites aren’t the only ones who blahblah. Duh.).
This applies to a lot of pop culture beyond rap and hip hop (American Idol, reality shows, thriller/legal/murder/romance bestsellers, etc). You aren’t “better” than the great unwashed masses, get over it.
They for most intents and purposes are not working in the same field. The man wants to be remembered as great like other people considered to be great. That doesn’t mean he is trying to invite a musical comparison.
Compared along what lines though? How could you objectively compare say Michael Jackson and Beethoven? Do we go by who sold the most records or had the most fans? How exactly could you make such a comparison that has any substance aside from the delta in quality between them and their peers?
Find me three respected critics who would agree with your statement. As far as being remembered in 100, I have no idea if that will be the case. Who knows if the Beatles will be listened to in 100 years. Even if either of them faded into obscurity, it wouldn’t make their work less important or meaningful.
Bullshit. Keeping fame is much harder. How many people have been as famous as either of them for as long? The woman works hard, and is basically a mogul at this point. You don’t have to like her shit, but is famous for doing a number of things.
Half of Vogue’s audience are billionaire trophy wives? Really? Look at their demographics. It’s mostly middle class women in their late-thirties who are moderately well-educated. KUWTK demos are strongest with women 18-34. According to Nielsen, Kardashian viewers tend to be single, college-educated women with no children, white-collar jobs and annual salaries of more than $60,000. That is pretty close to Vogue’s demo, and certainly one they would love to have more of. I doubt most people even know who Melania Trump is, and even if they do, they are certainly not as influenced by her as they are by Kim.
It was an off the cuff remark. No need to play semantics when I think his intent, which is lamentable enough, needs to be questioned.
That he is moved and inspired by people, not fictional characters.
