Focus Group Art 115
KillBot writes "What's the most pleasing image to casual art viewers? Two deer and a hippopotamus in a mountain lake on a partly cloudy day with people relaxing near the shore. According to a survey of 1,001 adults by two Russian artists, they like wild animals, water, ordinary people having fun and the color blue. And this made me laugh, the most unwanted painting shows randomly scattered, overlapping triangles and rectangles in shades of gold, orange, peach and tea. Nando Times is carrying the full story. "
Komar and Melamid rule! (Score:2)
adr
Go to the source: (Score:5)
The idea is not art by focus groups (Score:1)
Isn't this a little old, by the way? I remember hearing about the survey months and months ago.
i wish... (Score:1)
Cherry trees 'n' wooden teeth (Score:1)
I can't figure if the story behind the events depicted in this painting is a Kilgore Trout-esque sci-fi tale, or an intricate alternate history... America's founding fathers struggle in the pristine (but uncharacteristically exotic, I suppose, to get the hippo in there. Genetic mutation, maybe?) wilderness. I see Washington, Jefferson, and, heck, how about Lincoln and DDE, fighting off attack giraffes for God and country, in the style of Clan of the Cave Bear.
Think it'll fly?
Old News (Score:1)
MS Painting Generator 1.0 (Score:2)
Insert assorted mammals, and you have a winner!
A Dahli-esque expression from the subconciousness (Score:1)
Focus group music (Score:2)
The russian guys were all excited about having produced "democratic" music. gag me with a tuning fork, their "ideal" music pretty much sucked.
Re:The idea is not art by focus groups (Score:3)
I'd have to disagree... artists might be out of touch with the kind of pretty pictures that people want on their walls, but that's not really the purpose of Art with a capital A... Art should challenge viewers, produce a reaction - if it also happens to be pretty enough to enjoy on a wall, so much the better, but that is not its primary purpose, I'd say...
And this exhibit tells you exactly why this is true: left to his/her own tastes, the mythical Average Person chooses remarkably similar things, as dictated by some atavistic primate brain's comfort level. This is exactly what Art should seek to challenge!
Unfortunately, this makes Art an elite pursuit, but its always been true that things like high art and pure science are luxuries available only after basic needs are met: people painted in caves only after they'd finished hunting that antelope.
Then again, I'm a scientist/engineer - so what do I know about art?
Re:The idea is not art by focus groups (Score:2)
/peter
Re:Old News (Score:1)
Re:The idea is not art by focus groups (Score:2)
That is most emphatically NOT the point. You are missing several layers of irony.
Taste is culturally defined... (Score:2)
The painting the casual viewer in the Netherlands would HATE most was also made: a horrible (awful! terrible!) landscape, painted in a messy style, and containing a fruitbowl and a portrait of Bill Clinton. Apparently contemporary celebrities, landscapes, still-lifes and a messy painting style were what the Dutch dislike most.
-----
Where is the creativity? (Score:3)
What about Dali with his weird distorted objects? What about some indoor scene? What about a sunset?
There isn't much detail on how this "study" was done, but it appears to me to not have been particularly well done--unless there are details I'm not aware of.
Duh (Score:1)
Actually, in all seriousness, some of the propaganda tiles are *really* nice to look at. If I had the energy or the inclination, I might pick a favorite, tile it, and then have some wallpaper (actual wallpaper, not the computer kind) made for my computer room... That would be tres cool, although probably a little psycho.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Taste and how we get it (Score:2)
People's reactions to art, which can be quite strong, are nevertheless conditioned by a number of factors they are probably not aware of. Anyone interested in the way taste is constructed might want to read Distinction by French anthropologist Pierre Bourdieu (Eng trans edition in print).
Class, status, and educational background play a strong role in conditioning what we like and don't like in our art. Bourdieu's results are similar to the artists': The majority of the populace, being middle class and of average education, likes pictures of animals, water, sunsets, children, people relaxing, etc. A group with higher education prefers more abstract images. Above all, each group hates what the other likes. According to Bourdieu, the elites shun what is associated with inferior taste, while the lower- and middle- classes hate what would be prohibited from them anyway. (Remember that enjoying art is never simply a neutral aesthetic experience: there is a whole language of appreciation that must be learned and which can therefore be controlled and restricted.)
To make a point, I have simplified Bourdieu's presentation. His data, on French subjects, cover a wide range of very finely-subdivided social groups. Furthermore, I believe we must leave some room for personal beliefs that are not entirely conditioned by cultural forces. Overall, though, one must agree that social and cultural factors over which a subject may have little or no control condition his or her ``appreciation'' of art to a significant extent.
The so called "Tyranny of the majority" (Score:2)
I'm a little unsure as to what they mean by this. What other standard do you hold art to? Should we hang whatever art the minority would have us hang in our galleries? Or should it be "even", one half representational, one half abstract? This would strike me as tyranny of the minority--the notion that those few psuedo-intellectual artists have a better idea of what should be consumed than the majority is a bit disturbing. There is nothing stopping those rare few artists from displaying their own work on their own dollar.
This is not to say that I believe that the whim of the majority should be the only voice, but it is an important one. Sometimes there are legitimate reasons for ignoring the majority. For example, some art is undoubtably an acquired taste, which takes time for significant portions of the public to come around. On the other hand, even if you assume that a particular painting has intrinsic merit, should it be on the dollar of the majority which will never come around to enjoying it....
i'm still partial... (Score:1)
i got a few around my home(when im not at college). ill get an original one day =)
Gorfin
Bowie Poag kicks ass (Score:1)
IT'S FUNNY. LAUGH. (Score:2)
They're artists. And their art, in this case, is a statement about everything BUT (good) art.
I think they make an excellent point on the hazard of buying into groupthink. They're poking fun at most of society, rather like adults poke fun at teenagers who express their unique individualism by all dressing the same.
But most of all, they're having fun. Yanking some chains. Er, in which case, I suppose, you're supposed to be taking it all so seriously.
Just remember to laugh at yourself as you do so.
Re:Go to the source: (Score:2)
---
"'Is not a quine' is not a quine" is a quine.
Connection between countrys? (Score:1)
And the "Most Popular Art Award" goes to... (Score:1)
Art is by no means a tool to make the majority happy, content or pleased, it's sole purpose is to reflect upon us the mind and soul of it's creator, thus giving us a different prespective to our own.
If the day that art quality will be valued upon it's popularity will came, we should all be worried for the sake of our society...
Suprisingly enough - the only decent art piece chosen as most popular was the web one
But they did not use any Genetic Methods! (Score:1)
( Note I origionally wrote
WTF? (Score:1)
Okay... Hemos ordinarily can't spell, but that is a travesty of the english language.
Re:based upon the paintings i'd like to live... (Score:1)
Re:The idea is not art by focus groups (Score:1)
Re:Kilbot is stretching it a bit (Score:1)
There is no picture with both a deer and a hippo.
You're right, because a hippo and a deer together is ART.
Art (Score:2)
Any serious artist already knows it's a hit or miss type of thing - you do it because it's fun, not because you're trying to make money. The former is feasible, the latter will drive you insane if you try too hard. Here's another way of looking at it - if even 1 in a 100 people like your work in the US, you have a market of 2.5 million people.
--
Re:The idea is not art by focus groups (Score:1)
Re:Go to the source: (Score:2)
It raised deep suspicions in me; if you ask 1001 adults in any country for their favourite painting, you're going to get at least 900 different answers. The only way the answers produced could be gleaned is if our Russian artist chums painted blue landscapes and cubist primary colours, with a few extras thrown in for the pretence of variety.
If you want a true barometer of people's tastes, check out the art galleries and flea markets that sell full-size prints of existing paintings. How many people have a print of Dali's Elephants? Constable's Haywain?
On a different topic: fair or not, the world views America as a land obsessed with celebrity. As US culture becomes more dominant throughout the world this attitude is becoming more ubiquitous, but it's hardly suprising to me that your average American would prefer a painting in which they could point out George to visitors. Stereotyping? Possibly.
Re:Art (Score:1)
By the way, when did Metallica switch to 'alternative'? I think you are confused. The definition of Heavy Metal might have changed, and Metallica has definetly evolved as a band, but maturity is a good thing, and they still rock as hard as ever. If you think that typical heavy metal is a band like Korn, then do me a favor. Go look at some Korn tab, they don't have a single song that I can't memorize how to play in like 5 minutes. Then go look at Metallica. The don't have a single riff that I can memorize in 5 minutes.
Re:Where is the creativity? (Score:1)
"Tyranny of the majority" == Microsoft (Score:1)
Re:Taste is culturally defined... (Score:1)
-----
The People's Choice Music (Score:2)
From the site's description: "The most unwanted music is over 25 minutes long, veers wildly between loud and quiet sections, between fast and slow tempos, and features timbres of extremely high and low pitch, with each dichotomy presented in abrupt transition. The most unwanted orchestra was determined to be large, and features the accordion and bagpipe (which tie at 13% as the most unwanted instrument), banjo, flute, tuba, harp, organ, synthesizer (the only instrument that appears in both the most wanted and most unwanted ensembles). An operatic soprano raps and sings atonal music, advertising jingles, political slogans, and "elevator" music, and a children's choir sings jingles and holiday songs. The most unwanted subjects for lyrics are cowboys and holidays, and the most unwanted listening circumstances are involuntary exposure to commericals and elevator music. Therefore, it can be shown that if there is no covariance--someone who dislikes bagpipes is as likely to hate elevator music as someone who despises the organ, for example--fewer than 200 individuals of the world's total population would enjoy this piece."
These guys also did a CD (Score:1)
The world's worst song was over 20 minutes and had opera, bagpipes, and long instrimentals. You might think for a minute that this could be good, especially if you like experimental music or have other odd tastes. No it really sucked. It was definitely the absolute worst thing I have ever heard, no redeeming value what so ever.
Check it out if you can, it was pretty funny to hear what most people like and dislike about music.
On Slashdot cheerleaders... (Score:2)
However, Windows would be a lot better for the average consumer if MS did not enjoy its monopoly power. That is to say, that while Windows might currently be the best option for Joe Schmoe, operating system and application quality has not improved significantly in years. If MS's monopoly position were to be knocked down, the consumer would benefit greatly as competition comes about (nothing to do with Linux neccessarily).
Re:And the "Most Popular Art Award" goes to... (Score:1)
Of course it isn't. Art only has to make one person content or pleased -- the buyer! And one popular genre of art is "modern ugly", because the buyer can feel smug and hip for owning such a great piece of art that lesser mortals can't grok.
Re:Go to the source: (Score:1)
George Washington is inextricably part of the culture of the United States. It is somewhat comforting that he still is in our collective minds, considering the generally short attention span that we seem to have developed.
Deflating expression (Score:1)
ditto that (Score:1)
But what gets me is that almost everybody wants a painting like that. What has become of the free-mind?
Fish! They're all Fish!
Re:Connection between countrys? (Score:1)
As humourous as the idea is... (Score:1)
"It was our idea to visualize this view of the new kind of dictator, because we grow up in a condition of dictatorship - Lenin, Stalin, etc. And when we came to United States, we recognized that another dictator here is the so-called majority."
The so-called majority. Tobacco lobbyists, Microsoft lobbyist, gun lobbyists, etc. Every group with a vested interest in something and a lot of money can basically stuff the ballot box. The great unwashed generally doesn't notice, or care.
Demoncracy works because people make informed decisions, have a variety from which to choose, and because the people chosen to lead have some vision for how the country should be. Remove any of those, and you start to stagnate.
Think Hippopatmi near a lake which is surrounded by decidous forests (!?) with random people and George Washington. Methinks the Hippo Group and Washington Group took away from an OK blue-ish lake painting.
---
Those are the RESULTS (Score:2)
- Freehold, well read Canadian. Well, Canadian anyway.
Re:But they did not use any Genetic Methods! (Score:1)
What!?! (Score:2)
What, no Weiner Dog Art? No velvet Elvis? Not even Dogs Playing Poker? Sheesh--these people may know art, but they don't know what they like.
Re:One Point You Make Is Off A Bit - clarification (Score:1)
I should have clarified what I meant by controlled or restricted. Perhaps I should have said inaccessible or exclusive. The point is that learning the ``right way'' to appreciate a work of art requires a lot of education. At the same time, the content of that education is the product of the group that can afford to be educated by it. In this (circular) way, knowledge of how to look at art and what to say about it is in fact restricted (though perhaps never consciously). It's not enough to go to the public library and read the books, either. Books don't teach the many other subtle but important habits of the learned art critic, such as how to walk or speak in a gallery, what tone of voice to use, what allusions to make, how to make the knowing glance, and in general how to emanate knowledge and control over that knowledge. State of body is as important as state of mind, and the uninitiated is easily spotted. (Perhaps here I should restate another point I made, namely that this is not an unbreakable loop. The impressionist painters you mention somehow managed to thrive, despite the hostile reception of art critics and Paris salons, to the extent that they have been immortally canonized today.)
On another topic, I think your Linux example is related, though for other reasons as well. There is no doubt that the Linux community has its own social practices, among which is the deprecation of Microsoft's stifling mercantilism. (People have written about the ``gift exchange'' economy of the open source community.) At the same time, though, see what happens when someone from, say, AOL posts to /. and makes errors in content and the spelling of technical terms. He or she is very quickly flamed for being so ignorant, with the same contempt you can see in the eyes of a university art student when the old lady next to him scans a Monet and says ``Ooh what a pretty picture!'' in the same way, AOL lusers don't stand a chance: they don't belong here is the immediate consensus. So I think in fact the Linux community is as much an example as any other that you cannot be accepted until you learn to talk the talk, and walk the walk. (This coming from a dedicated Linux user :-)
Re:The idea is not art by focus groups (Score:1)
is touch with the kind of art that ordinary people want to have around them - in fact, prostitues himself (or herself)
The ordinary folks watch a baseball on their TVs with a sixpack of Bud. That's about all the art they care.
Populist Art is oxymoron (Score:1)
Article of this kind is based on a common myth about art (at least in mid-west state like Minn.). Art (instead of Commercials) is not just for "pleasing" or evoke "oh..." from women pressing their hands to their heart with tilting heads. Art is about relate emotions from painter to the viewer. It can be either beauty and ugliness, either pleasing or offending, uplifting or depressing. Good art does not nessassarily have to "please" you, but to touch your raw emotion nerve.
A good movie such as "saving private ryan" can be bloody and disguisting as any movie can be and still be treated as high achievement. So is painting and other form of arts.
Re:IT'S A STUNT. LAUGH. (Score:1)
What these guys are doing is more like the Vancouver, BC, artist who garnered major attention through the art he was going to do.
Which was going to be produced, he claimed, by dropping a concrete block on a rat. The straight-man routine being that the blood splatter would be artistic, but the *REAL* art being his ability to manipulate the media and all the Greenpeace geeks who freaked.
Here at Slashdot, we have a lot of stats geeks, social geeks and philosophy geeks going on about all the flaws and meanings of the work the two Russians have done.
When, really, the art is in their ability to give your brain a bit of a poke.
It's a stunt. It's funny. It isn't particularly deep. Laugh.
The Greenpeace geeks, by the way, bought the rat from the Vancouver artist.
Clarification (Score:1)
Contrary to what some readers seem to think, the paintings were not done beforehand and then the people asked to choose between them. Rather, the artists made the paintings based on the answers to a survey [diacenter.org].
The decision to put the mountain at the left and the tree at the right was made by the artists, not drawn from the results of the poll. I do agree that it borders on mania, but then, insofar as the countries did not express differences on these subjects, why change?
Re:Art (Score:1)
Alot of artist are in it simply for the popularity and/or the money, but there are a few, those blessed few, that actually are in it because music beats in their hearts and they feel called to do it.
Also, the caliber of an artist does not depend on how long it takes to memorize their licks. I must admit though that if you can learn and play *everything* of theirs easily, that's ridiculous.
I am a guitarist (because I love to do it), my father was, and so was one of my friends. One day my father and I went to play with that friend and afterwards my father said under his breath, "This was his whole style..." and played one lick. He was right, and I realized that I didn't want to become that kind of musician.
So art does not depend on the complexity of the things you do, it depends on how much feeling you put into what you *do* do and how much variety you have in you *whole* style.
If someone only does one thing, then it's not art. But it's not exactly *how many* things that person does that make it art.
Re:Art (Score:1)
I think if you looked at the tab to the Korn songs you would see what I mean, all the songs are basically the same, the fingers hardly have to change position and there in little or no syncopation to complicate playing. The music's lack of anything resembling form or fashion is held together by distortion and the singer's horrible voice is hid by shouting at the top of his lungs. Watching the band further proves their lack of grasp on the music, they jump up and down in a way that is not even.."in sync" with the music, for lack of a better definition. If you have played seriously I think you will know what I mean about feeling the music.
I probably have just offended alot of Korn fans, and I am sorry, if you like the music then that is fine, I am not here to impose my beliefs on anyone. And maybe I am underestimating thier talent, but if they have any then I need to become a musician because I have a far better grasp on music theory than anything I have heard from them.
Re:Taste is culturally defined... (Score:1)
It's a definitely a cultural thing, and I'm happy I've absorbed alot of it.
Re:Taste is culturally defined... (Score:1)
The cultural differences are interesting, though not surprising. I guess I would expect most people to choose money over art, and that most Americans really really like Norman Rockwell and have never heard of Salvador Dali. Still, it makes me a bit sad. I guess I like to delude myself that average Americans are more culturally literate, and interested in art, than that.
(Not to say anything against Norman Rockwell -- to each his own. It's the number of people who hadn't heard of many of the listed artists that appalled me.)
Re:Linux, art, and open source culture (Score:1)
Thanks, Ron.
I think it would be very interesting to study the cultural practices of the free software community. There's a lot of good data in Eric Raymond's stuff, as well as the things that have been written on the gift-exchange culture of open source. It's amazing what elaborate and subtle systems of creating and maintaining relationships of trust and mutual benefit there are, and in an world where no one can see anyone else's face.
I'm struck by the similarities to the practices of the aristocracy in archaic Greece (say, 8th to 6th century BC). These people established and maintained reciprocal relationships over distances of hundreds of miles, and through the course of many generations. Thus it was possible (as it is in a sense with the open source community) for people who had never met to know that they were guest-friends. Foremost among their methods was the exchange of valuable gifts (and the vehement rejection of the use of money or of any attempts to place a cash valuation of those gifts), which would bring prestige to the giver and benefit the recipient while putting an obligation on him to return the favor at some later date. They also shared a vast knowledge of ``right ways'' to think about things and do things which were, in principle, unforgeable. In a sense, these were both communication and authentication protocols. (So also with e-commerce: the problem of anonymous authentication is not new.)
Anyway, this is getting kind of off the topic. But it's interesting stuff.
Cheers,
Jed
The CD ... (Score:2)
First of all.... (Score:1)
One more thing: the least favorite for Italy [diacenter.org] is golden. It has it all: Elvis, a Power Ranger, and male nekkidness. Not only that, but violence (or maybe the arrows are a form of self-expression for the man?) Now if only it was the Pink Ranger that was filled full of arrows...
-Smitty
Re:Taste is culturally defined... (Score:1)
I must really be the avarage Dutchman when it comes to taste in art, because I kind of like it, and I can't politely express how much I hate the Dutch 'Least Wanted' painting.
-----
Re:The idea is not art by focus groups (Score:1)
Re:Windoze??? (Score:1)
Maybe *you* don't "get it". (Score:1)
They seem to think that the power of dictatorships is the same than [sic] the power of the majority in a political election, or any other poll, for that matter.
If the majority decides to throw a minority in camps (See "WWII, treatment of loyal US citizens with Japanese heritage, during"; see also the rate of incarceration in the US in 1999 compared to the rate of incarceration in the USSR during the purges of the 1930's -- we're ahead), it's damn near identical.
In the US the preferences and views of the majority are often rammed down the throats of the rest of the population. Not always, but often enough to be a problem. It's annoying and idiotic. The majority wants to spend my tax dollars teaching their religion to my children in the public schools. Please explain how this is qualitatively different from education in the USSR.
they moved to the States in 1978!
21 years and still they don't get it.
"Yeah, them goldurn furriners!"
They've lived in both systems. They've seen both systems up close and personal. You haven't. Funny how Americans who don't even have passports always know more about the world than those who've actually been there . . .
Re:Go to the source: (Score:1)
32 x 24
Bagpipe and banjo RULE, man, what's wrong here?! (Score:1)
Jesus! These people don't like bagpipes. Holy shit. What is their problem?! Good heavens. Obviously they didn't interview too many Irish cops in NYC, that's for sure . . . Nor too many Celts elsewhere. Nor me, for God's sake!
Actually, bagpipes are traditionally used all over: In Spain, the Middle East, Turkey, etc. I don't know about Asia, though. It's a really old instrument, not to mention a fantastically cool one. Bear in mind that what most people think of as "bagpipes" are the Scottish variety, which are more of an acquired taste (though well worth acquiring, believe me!) than most varieties. Irish ("Uilleann") pipes are a different instrument, softer and more nasal in tone. Their only fault, IIRC, is that they aren't able to produce a "drone" note under the melody as Scots pipes do. If you have the Pogues Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash handy, listen to "I'm a Man You Don't Meet Every Day". The instrumental break there is uilleann pipes. You might also pick up the Bothy Band's Out of the Wind Into the Sun, which aside from being generally brilliant has a few pipes-centric tunes on it which serve as a good introduction to the uilleann pipes. I'm not sure what a purist would think of that record, but I'm not a purist and I dig it enormously.
I don't agree about democracy (OT) (Score:1)
"The principle of democracy is that over 50% of the people can get it right over 50% of the time. Whoever came up with this was obviously a moron."
Robert Heinlein felt that way, too: "Zero times a million still equals zero", or some such. It's a snappy bon mot, but IMHO it misses the point.
The purpose of democracy is not to govern well as such. Rather, it is to minimize the natural human tendency to govern badly. The purpose of democracy is to prevent tyrrany by putting authority over the government in the hands of the people who will suffer from its mistakes. Stalin didn't have to suffer from the mistakes he made. The US voter does.
On the whole, the US voter has done a better job than Stalin did: Even though the US voter is, arguably, a moron, his record of less than 50% is in fact remarkably good compared to that of your average dictator. When the voters do something stupid, that's a bummer, but they do seem to learn from their mistakes sometimes (or at the very least repent and vote in a new and different set of thieves once in a while).
In other words, since the decline of the doctrine of the divine right of kings, a government has been generally seen to have no reason for being other than to benefit its constituents. They have to put up with it, they fund it, why not let them run it? It's theirs. Heinlein says that if you let people vote, they'll vote themselves bread and circuses and society will ultimately collapse. He's right. What he doesn't mention is that if you don't let them vote, things are likely to be a hell of a lot worse. I'm sure we all remember Churchill's laugh line about how of all the rotten systems of government, democracy is the least rotten . . . The great thing about it is that the system itself has a built-in tendency to control its own excesses. By contrast, a really good philosopher-king will govern far better than any nation of voters ever did -- but he will one day die, and his son may be a hopeless incompetent, and you'll up shit crick. Democracy tends to average it all out, and provide a consistent output of mild incompetence and venality. In avoiding Catherine the Great we lose Peter the Great. Bummer.
This painting thing is funny because art and government have no parallels. Exceptionally bad art won't destroy us on the one hand, and on the other hand if there is no great art, then art is not worth having at all. A mediocre government can be a satisfactory government, while mediocre art is of no worth whatsoever.
Arrows: St. Sebastian (Score:1)
St. Sebastian (patron of archers, athletes, and soldiers; died c. AD 288) was a Roman soldier who, upon being revealed as a Christian, was shot full of arrows, which he surived. There are a few different paintings depicting the event, some better-known than others. It looks to me like they're hitting the St. Sebastian button with the arrows there.
-----------------------------------------------
St. Sebastian info from John J. Delaney, Dictionary of Saints, Doubleday, 1980. It's a handy book to have around the house. The pink power ranger is not mentioned as a martyr, either actual or potential.
That is not what I said at all. (Score:2)
To reiterate, at some point you must concede that a minority should not be given carte blanche on the public's back. It comes down to proportion and taste. I would never argue that 51% (55, 70, 80, etc) should be able to shut down other forms of public forms of expression when they can be done at REASONABLE cost. Below certain point, you must concede, that the minority should give way to the majority. Particularly when we have 10k minute minorites all fighting for funding--none of which can come to any consensus--which has the effect of crowding out more timeless and widely appreciated works. We live in a world of finite resources, as such some sacrifices must be made--not everyone can have their way all the time.
For the record, I'm about to graduate with a 4.0 from one of the top universities in the country. I'm most likely going to pursue a graduate degree, though not in the liberal arts. Because I made my career choice of my own volition, I do not have any motivation to "put them down a peg".
Re:Komar and Melamid rule! (Score:3)
The interesting thing about the project is that they aren't trying to produce a bad song, but a good song that practically nobody would like. Unfortunately, they're foiled by covariance.
Playing the CD for others, I noticed something interesting. With the exception of musicians, very few adults can stand to listen to the "least wanted" song, but whenever I've played it it for children, they have a blast; they jump around and dance and sing along loudly and off-key. They're absolutely delighted by its deliberate obnoxiousness.
Re:The so called "Tyranny of the majority" (Score:1)
No public funding for the arts (Score:1)
p.s. this stuff was FUNNY! "Funny" -- you know, makes you laugh. Like "50% of all people are stupider than the average person" and "half of all households have a sub-median income".
YOU will like pokey the penguin! (Score:1)
Go read POKEY THE PEGNUIN [yellow5.com]!!! It will challenge you! It assaults your brain-pan and criticizes your senses! It's a full frontal assault of pixelized fury~! And you die!#@
Re:The CD ... (Score:1)
I watched 'Manos: Hands Of Fate' MST3K... (Score:2)
I think this qualifies me to really enjoy the sick humor of this horrible piece of music
*ROFL* I love it :) (Score:2)
"The problems of balancing such a varied set of instruments are, as you might imagine, enormous, and they are problems that P.D.Q. _entirely_ failed to solve... when the bagpipes are playing you can't hear anything else... whereas the lute is such a soft instrument that even if another instrument is on the stage with it, you can't hear it (whether the other instrument is playing or not). But the lute looks nice... and we think that, the visual effect, is shortchanged in the modern concertgoing experience... it's a very nice lute... and we hope you enjoy it... think of it while you're listening to the bagpipes.
-Peter Schickele, impresario
Re:YOU will like pokey the penguin! (Score:1)
Re:YOU will like pokey the penguin! (Score:2)
I'd also recommend to anyone to read Scott McCloud's outstanding book, "Understanding Comics." This book examines comics with an amazing insight, and touches on everything from philosophy to history, both of comics and of people in general. Two thumbs up! :)
the Free Mind (Score:1)
You're right.. I did. And I apologize for that. The Free Mind may like what it wishes to like. I was stereotyping by making the generalization that people, by becoming a majority and liking a certain painting/type of painting were not exercising their Free Mind. Really, though, they were, unless they all got together and said "hey, we'll all vote this way." (Which they probably didn't do.) I guess I got stuck on "most-popular," "landscape," and what appeared to me to be the extreme uniformity of it all. But hey, if people like that, I'm glad. Someone has to. But yes, the Free Mind may choose whichever painting I damn well please, and darnit, if you like that, more power to you.