Wilco in designer clothes

[noyes]

I just don't think anyone can define what talent is and have it apply for everyone. I think John Mayer is one of the most talented guitarists in the world, but I know a lot of people consider him to be a crappy guitarist.

 

then you and I can agree that they are delusional and their standards are TOO high.

if he is a crappy guitarist, than what is someone that can only strum C and G. and badly at that.

that's called unrealistic.

[EL the Famous]

for example,

you can't honestly sit there and tell me that a movie like "Epic Movie" is on the same level artistically speaking as, say, "Schindler's List" or "Taxi Driver"

just because someone may enjoy it and someone may be perfectly content with it doesn't mean it is equal to pieces of cinema that actually has real and powerful talent behind it.

"enjoyment" of both movies is subjective, yes, but pulling the "it's subjective" card in the case of artistic merit is futile and unrealistic.

this should be, and is (in most instances), common sense.

 

i can't say that, but i don't see why someone else couldn't. why can't it be? because it's a comedy or based entirely in satire?

 

personally, yes i find more 'artistic merit' in those other films...but my point is that my definition of artistic merit may be completely different than someone else's. those of you who keep arguing that this is a definitive/universal standard keep using the most apples/oranges comparisons to make your case.

 

again, lets try this again using my earlier example:

for example,

you can't honestly sit there and tell me that a movie like "Big Trouble in Little China" is on the same level artistically speaking as, say, "Schindler's List" or "Taxi Driver"

 

yes, i can. for completely different reasons than the other two, but yes. they are three different films with enough merit to me in their own context to make them what i consider to be equals.

 

respectfully, pulling the "it's subjective" card in the case of artistic merit is not at all futile and unrealistic...trying to convince people to subscribe to a common definition of 'artistic merit' (IMO) is.

[Scott Gyrrr]

I'm relatively new to Wilco, friends had been trying to get me to listen to them for years, but for some reason Sky Blue Sky really stuck with me and caused me to get into EVERYTHING they've ever done.

 

I read an interview with RA that he gave around the time of his release of Heartbreaker where he said that he thought he was a much better songwriter than JT. As a matter of factual basis I don't really mind him saying that, since at the time, I think on AM would have come out by then (as well as the Uncle Tupelo stuff). I really think BT was where Tweedy pole-vaulted himself past the pack in terms of songwriting.

 

Hey fkinbs Just thought i'd point out that, when Heartbreaker came out Wilco was up to the second Mermaid record having already released A.M, Being There, Mermaid one and Summerteeth.

 

Yankee Hotel Foxtrot came out in 2002 which was when they fired Jay Bennet for not wearing designer clothes.

 

My only knowledge of shit between JT & RA was a comment about how Jeff was happy "some one is still using our old sound" Not sure about the source of that though.

[noyes]

here's the difference:

 

Big Trouble in Little China is an awesome movie!

 

 

(not joking btw)

[EL the Famous]

indeed.

[noyes]

btw, you're right. your argument holds up nicely.

so does yours chompsky (your latter half posts)

[EL the Famous]

btw, you're right. your argument holds up nicely.

so does yours chompsky (your latter half posts)

 

for the record, i do understand where you and others are coming from...i just can't find myself able to tell somebody that what they find has artistic merit, doesn't. because i find both the words 'artistic' and 'merit' too hard not to find some level of subjectivity in.

 

it's all good though...it does make for intertesting discussion. people seem to hate these threads, but i think it's fun to bat the whole thing around.

[bobbob1313]

Yeah, I don't get why people keep on bashing this thread. I think it's had some pretty interesting discussion. Admittedly, it's gotta ridiculous at points, but I think it's been pretty good the past few threads. I'd rather discuss this than most of the crap that gets tossed around on this board.

[EL the Famous]

ditto. i find it no more ridiculous than 50% of the other thread in Just A Fan.

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

It's the battle of worldviews here.

[Lammycat]

That's just your opinion though.

 

 

 

heh.

[bobbob1313]

Well, thats just like, your opinion, man.

 

[EL the Famous]

It's the battle of worldviews here.

 

what the hell is your problem w/ big trouble in little china?! go merge some threads, illuminati!

[Synthesizer Patel]

if something can't be concidered factually as better than something else, and something can't be concidered factually as worse than something else - cos they are both, apparently, subjective terms. how can something be concidered THE SAME as something else? as that fits into the same framework, and therefore involves subjectivity. all that is left, therefore, is to say that everything is nothing. isn't it?

 

and i like this thread too. what's not to like about it.

[caliber66]

if something can't be concidered factually as better than something else, and something can't be concidered factually as worse than something else - cos they are both, apparently, subjective terms. how can something be concidered THE SAME as something else? as that fits into the same framework, and therefore involves subjectivity. all that is left, therefore, is to say that everything is nothing. isn't it?

 

and i like this thread too. what's not to like about it.

Pretty much all that's left to say is that the artistic merit of everything is up to the viewer/listener to decide for himself.

[Good Old Neon]

I honestly don't see how you can say "talent" isn't a completely subjective term.

 

Then does it follow to say my 13 year old nephew, who is just now learning to play the guitar, can barely form a chord, is equally as talented as, say, Eddie Van Halen? And that the tortured sounds he produces are the equal of anything Mr. Van Halen has ever produced?

 

If I am using extreme examples, it because you are taking an extreme position.

[JUDE]

Then does it follow to say my 13 year old nephew, who is just now learning to play the guitar, can barely form a chord, is equally as talented as, say, Eddie Van Halen? And that the tortured sounds he produces are the equal of anything Mr. Van Halen has ever produced?

 

If I am using extreme examples, it because you are taking an extreme position.

 

 

Ok how about this, a guitar player goes to the Musicians Institute of Technology for a few years, he becomes extremely technically proficient. He can play any chromatic or pentatonic scale in any variation and is well versed in musical theory. Is he a better "artist" than say Keith Richards, or Tom Petty?

[Synthesizer Patel]

Pretty much all that's left to say is that the artistic merit of everything is up to the viewer/listener to decide for himself.

 

so you're of the opinion that when a tree falls in the woods it makes no sound, cos there is nobody there to hear it. if there is no viewer or listener then it doesn't exist as a "thing." is that what you are saying?

[ction]

Is Yngvie Malmsteen's Rising Force better than Black Flag's Damaged?

[myboyblue]

This thread's got legs!

[Synthesizer Patel]

talent and artistic ability is only one part of making art. obviously if you have none then you can't make good art - then if you have a small amount but a lot of imagination (another factor) then this will balance it out and you can make good art. equally, if you're very talented and have no imagination then you will be unable to make good art. someone somewhere is bound to be coming up with a formula for all this.

[Good Old Neon]

Ok how about this, a guitar player goes to the Musicians Institute of Technology for a few years, he becomes extremely technically proficient. He can play any chromatic or pentatonic scale in any variation and is well versed in musical theory. Is he a better "artist" than say Keith Richards, or Tom Petty?

 

On a purely technical level, sure, I would say that person is probably a better guitar player

[caliber66]

so you're of the opinion that when a tree falls in the woods it makes no sound, cos there is nobody there to hear it. if there is no viewer or listener then it doesn't exist as a "thing." is that what you are saying?

Bad analogy, because if we're comparing trees falling to art, then there's going to be a lumberjack around to hear the sound of the falling tree. And the first person to experience a piece of art would be the artist, right? But yes, in order for the "merit" of a work of art to be judged, someone has to experience it.

[JUDE]

On a purely technical level, sure, I would say that person is probably a better guitar player

[embiggen]

This thread's got legs!

 

it's got arms too.