The Kunst Saga | How the Right Wing Views Modern Art
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 кві 2018
- Weaponized Culture.
---------
MUSIC USED:
Brian Eno - 1/1
CoH - 20000 Lieues
Brian Eno - 1/2
Aphex Twin - Lichen
VIDEOS REFERENCED:
Paul Joseph Watson Is A Pop Culture Pleb STINKPIECE: • Paul Joseph Watson Is ...
A Millennial Response to "The Truth About Popular Culture": • A Millennial Response ...
Paul Joseph Watson is Wrong About: Art: • Paul Joseph Watson is ...
Carl Andre - 'Works of Art Don't Mean Anything' | TateShots: • Carl Andre - 'Works of...
The Case for Minimalism: • The Case for Minimalis...
---
Listen to my music: patriciataxxon.bandcamp.com/
Follow me on Twitter: / patriciataxxon
antifa succ
![Love, Death + Robots is Kinda Sexist (feat. Jack Saint) [SFW VERSION]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/sUFSpTmz4Gc/mqdefault.jpg)
Why does Paul talk like that? He sounds like he's either struggling to speak, or he's emphasizing literally every word. Either way it's extremely annoying.
I think it's so you know he's British so he seems smart
He shouting angrily, too, which means he automatically has a point.
He sounds like he's making fun of himself? Like he's doing a parody of his own argument?
I think they're called "British people", very strange.
Sounds like he's about to cry any second. Looks like it too
I love how someone painting a blue rectangle with a white stripe down the middle can activate someone's primal rage
wait until that guy finds out about john cage's 4'33", that'll prolly triple it
@@dihydrogen u lame a poser. JOHN CAGE IS AS A CULTURAL MARXIST
Man you leftists are just unfathomable. You don't understand something, then also argue against it. That right there is madness from a sheer scientific perspective. It is impossible to refute something you literally have no concept of.
Try reading The Naked Communist. You and this guy who made this video. You both need it. If you READ IT, you'll see the 45 written plans of the communist party of america, that were exposed by the still trustworthy fbi. All they did was quote the plans into a book.
One of which states that one of the "ESSENTIAL" aspects of "overthrowing america" was to
"Replace aesthetically pleasing, balanced works of art, with UGLY MEANINGLESS, REPULSIVE ART. Replace the professors with ideologues who insist the value of such works. Destroy the comprehension of genuine beauty. Leave them listless and dull."
There. You understand yet? It's not mindless, like this video. It's that we understand that there is VERY real, very immediate, very PRESENT danger, that is happening globally, and with absolute disregard for the people and whether or not they accept it. This kind of crap is being FORCED down people's throats, like anti-white commercials and rhetoric.
@@dihydrogen pjw opens a blank document and immediately screams with anger because IT ISNT ART!!!
The point is the lack of earnest artistry from the left wing peddlers of trash. Watson is 💯 you’ll all be replaced by Dall-E.
“Leftist ruined art, now GAMERS are terrified” hearing Watson say basically that made me laugh out loud
"It used to be that you only had to write ONE hook to make a popular song," he says, whereas now you need to write many for each song. So, in other words, it's HARDER to write a hit song now than it was during whatever musical period he thinks was the zenith of culture?
It's sooo ironic the way he says it's become more repetitive and cites having to have multiple hooks (AKA a minimum of variety) as an example of it...
@@radiofloyd2359 guy says songs now are more boring and repetitive than ever they were. He must think folk music was invented in 2011 by mr mumford and his many sons
@@wabznasm9660 Yup, lmao.
I've seen My Bed in person and it was incredibly affecting... it really doesn't translate to photos. Honestly a big part of it is the lights and the pedestal and whatnot; the depression bed is such an emotionally loaded and intensely private thing and taking that and elevating it as an art piece is so intense and cool. Always bizarre to me how it's given as an example of like snooty non art (though I do think that's a mostly made up phenomenon) when it's really really communicative
I hadn't watched the whole video before I said this and uhhh wow pjw thinks periods are yucky omg
Really can't tell which one you mean
Omg… how there are stupid people in this world…
Fun story: I went to a modern art museum about a year back, I love simplicity and shapes and colors and I thought a lot of the art was pretty to look at. There was one piece I can't remember, but I read in the accompanying pamphlet about the exhibition that the piece, a room full of paintings with these shaky, red fading to black vertical lines on canvas, was about the Holocaust. It genuinely hit me, even before reading that, the raw emotions all around me, the way these lines were so violent and hopeless, it was like red bloody screams fading into black hopeless voids. It was the art that resonated with me the most that day. That piece was inspired by the Cy Twombly piece in that final PJW video. Modern art isn't dampening the human spirit, it's INSPIRING it. Now artistic expression doesn't require a dozen years in the most elite schools and commissions from the world's most powerful merchants, now art is about subjective, raw emotionality and reaction. Now you can make a piece that reflects an emotion or conveys an idea regardless of the piece's realism and people can resonate with that idea simply because they react with the same emotion or understand the idea put forth. That weird islamophobic piece Watson showed is offensive and I don't like the message it gives, but no one's saying it isn't art. It evokes response, maybe the responses it evoked were exactly what the artist hoped it would evoke. That's kinda the point of art. Your expression being thrown into the world and the reactions it creates. It being banned from the exhibit isn't a sign of the ruination of art, it's just another piece in the process.
@@carefulicarus7393 Hey man, are you okay? It seems like you're making this reply to a lot of comments on here and I'm not sure why you'd put so much into replying to people's subjective opinions on modern art but I hope you're having a happy holiday and spending good time with your family and friends
Yeah, i also think hitler is a great artist.
@@beegarrard9305ur comment is 10 times the size of his, apparently someone is triggered, and by what? Someone’s “subjective opinions”
I think i know what art piece your talking about, jacob geller talked about it in his video who's afraid of modern art
Not anyone's problem if you like bullcrap but that's no art, no matter the context. Skill matters
Okay, but if the glasses prank was done by Banksy, PJW would be praising the piece for being “edgy” and “topical to our social relativist society”
And Bansky was explicitly anti-capitalist.
Banksy also steals art and erases other tagger's work for the sake of his own.
Think what you want about Banksy, but he isn't a sacred cow.
Not gonna lie: I love art-world shenanigans like that.
We do NOT like banksy 😂
Boy do I love it when the Right gets pissed at a symptom of Capitalism and then goes on to attribute it to anything other than Capitalism!
Howd you reckon its capitalism that did it? That dosnt make any sense. Sure capitalism prioritizes profit. But it wasnt capitalism that made modern art or architecture worth any money. That happened in other ways. Capitalism just exasperates the issue.
Movies and pop music and being made in a way so as to maximise profits for shareholders and it’s terrible but also capitalism is the greatest force for good in history...
@@sydneycbr6466 the “greatest force for good in history” is causing the death of multiple forms of art (namely music and videogames) and is causing hundreds of millions of people to starve while leaving a man with enough money to literally solve every world problem. It’s also causing wars, and state capitalism has birthed multiple dictatorships, like the Soviet Union and China. Additionally, due to the requirement for infinite growth, an impossibility, it has directly caused multiple financial crashes. Notably, the Great Depression and the Great Recession
@@sydneycbr6466 additionally, Capitalist countries invade and destroy or else just starve Socialist countries and Communist/Anarchist societies before they even have the chance to feed their people, killing month old countries and then claiming the reason those countries failed was because “Socialism just doesn’t work!”, when it hasn’t even gotten the chance. Like killing a baby and then blaming it on the baby
@@timmythetechpriest5177 I admire your spirit, but I think the guy was joking
I think pranks are art. A well constructed prank leading to a perfectly framed moment is a thing of beauty.
yea hell no pranks are not art. lying to people and doing something to them without their consent is yucky behavior.
I can't stand Paul's voice
I love it honestly. It speaks more truth than any of his critics.
How do people go through a PJW video and not want to rip their hair out from his toxic levels of smugness? His voice is just unlistenable.
Wdym?
I love how a single video could activate someone’s pure rage. Hilarious
@@MerlinTheCommenter Then you clearly don't know the agony of experiencing PJW in *any* video.
His eyes have no spark in them and curl up as if in mock pity
He’s gorgeous.
I can’t believe I’m just seeing this now. Really amazing work
I love your work man! :)
oh, hey you!
those 66 likes probably made youtube recommend me this, thanks
Es lo que hay woah does UA-cam really do that?
maybe?
I love the comment sections on leftist youtube so much. Never know when and where a content creator I love is going to show up next
The world’s loudest British man kept going back to socialist realism as an example of something to just hate and I just can’t help but to giggle. Look at the style! It’s exactly what he thinks art SHOULD be, only with the word “socialist” in the name.
He probably has a warehouse of Thomas Kincaid paintings he can’t get rid of. That’ll piss someone off.
You're so right.
Not to mention that abstract art was forbidden in the USSR. The social realism was a style pushed by the state
Socialist realism was just copied from the art of the previous Tsarist era, Bolsheviks started copying that style. And we don't care who did it. It's not like we are going to oppose everything commies do because they're commies, we opposite what we consider to be wrong.
@@enlosluceros7236wat? you wanna take that one again?
90% of the "classics" of the 60s and 70s were created by the same producers employing the same session players.
Modern art has nothing to do with artists making classic art in the 70s or 60s.
@@user-ef3yc2vn6uwat
Look up Carol Kaye. Even bands with bass players would have Carol Kaye play the bass on the records. Brian Wilson was a brilliant bassist, but on most of the Beach Boys’ records, he was more of the savant director… an assistant producer within the band itself. Carol Kaye handled a lot of the bass. She was also affiliated with the “wrecking crew” of session musicians who performed on countless hit songs in the “sunshine era.”
Remember when edgelords would criticize Gene Simmons for being so bad at bass that he took bass lessons from “some woman”? That woman was CAROL KAYE!! Carol Kaye is a woman, sexists, but above all she is a talented human being!! That’s like saying “Billy Joel sucks at singing and piano so much that he had to take lessons from some random gay dude called Elton John.” Gene was a master taking lessons from another master!
Lots of ‘90s bands weren’t above using triggers and drum machines. I wouldn’t be surprised if Blink 182 did so on their later records. But does that mean Travis Barker wasn’t a talented drummer? Heck no! It’s just what you do to get a polished studio sound!
During Easter I went to a contemporary museum with my mom and one of the installations were three tables with a 100 white vases on them. A few of them had gold leaves engraved on them and layed out at random places on the tables were cheap, black permanent markers. What I loved about this installation was that people had obviously used the markers on the vases. Evidently, most drawings were done by kids ages 10 to 16 and even more interesting: every white vase was covered in drawings, but almost none of the vases with gold leaves on them had been vandalized.
As I started drawing on the vases I thought about what it was that made me hesitant to draw on the gold leaf ones other than a percieved value. I found it interesting that even when faced with the encouragement to vandalize something, our moral compass will not allow us to cross a certain line.
I ended up drawing on the gold leaf vases in the end, but it took me awhile and even when I did it, I made sure to only draw on the white surface and avoid the gold.
This is why I love art. I provokes you and then it makes you reflect on your reactions. . . unless you're Paul Joseph Watson... then you never get any further than feeling provoked and you completely fail to realise that that is the entire point of experiencing art.
This is the coolest comment I've ever seen on any video ever, period.
That is very sweet of you to say. Thank you
that sounds like a beautiful piece of art, im glad that you had that experience and gained some new insight :D
CaboosyMamusi - thank you for your nice comment
That's pretty clever actually.
It's incredibly amusing to me that Paul compares modern art to socialist realism when Abstract expressionism was actively promoted and highlighted abroad by the CIA in the 40s and 50s after WWII to secure American cultural dominance and act as a counterpoint specifically to socialist realism. But oh well...
Exactly! And that's why, among other things, modern art is a capitalistic product and many of the likes of PJW are too dumb to notice it, otherwise they will probably praise it.
@@aliifliss114 yeye but what about Russian socialist avant Garde stuff. Socialist realism was just fascist and oppressed people
You can’t just expect poor Paul to memorise art history can you?? His brainforce damaged brain could never
@Dave Hanson Dude go harass the neoliberals. If "the secret masters" of society were using the communist/capitalist conflict to control everyone, they wouldn't have found it necessary to shift the Overton window, (democrats are incredibly Capitalist, even Bernie Sanders,) using FBI intelligence operations, such that Communism was outside of it, while using the CIA to demolish communist countries from the inside.
And no, the Jews are not the secret rulers of society. The bourgeoisie run society, and fascists are their attack dog.
Dave Hanson What?
An additional point on the song lyrics part: grade reading level is a hilariously illegitimate way to judge song lyrics at all. Grade reading level is designed for long passages consisting of complete sentences of varied structures, so the results are only useful or indeed intelligible if you're examining particular prose writing styles.
PJW is *old man yells at cloud* personified
and you are little boy admiring urinals.
lsilvaj A F O O K I N G Y O U R I N A L ! ! !
at first i thought his video on tatoos was a parody or something, but nope.
He literally is the old man yells at cloud personified.
@@JM-fh1tv I'm pretty sure dada came before "modern" art.
Hans Gunsche Ok nazi pig
Paul: Ewww Modern Culture is hedonistic and desensitization.
Andre: Makes a simple pile of bricks, saying theres nothing with them, and that they hide nothing.
Paul: REEEEE THIS IS SO BAD
Cause it's shit.
Npcs offended by bricks.
paul: its all so pretentious and social justice
pile of bricks: is a pile of bricks
paul: HOW FUCKING DARE YOU
Modern art and contemporary is trash.
@@javierpacheco8234 How.
This video means a lot to me personally, not just because it was the first video that really got me out of the anti-sjw rabbit hole, but also because it completely changed my view of art as a whole. Hearing about Untitled (Perfect Lovers) really gave me a new appreciation for art, it (and the rest of the video) made me want to think more about art, what it means and all that junk. You may have issues with this video, but it will always be my favorite of yours, because it completely changed me as a person.
@Bloody Pulp Find a better insult
@Bloody Pulp Coward
Im happy for you, this video helped me get a better opinion about abstract art too. I watched Paul’s video when I was a bitter, younger artist. I dont even remember why I disliked Abstract art but im glad im more open minded about it even if I dont favour it.
"As long as it's been filtered through the lens of social justice, it can be considered art."
it's just bricks, Paul! It's just a brick, it can't hurt you.
Not without any kinetic energy, it can't.
It can't hurt him? Let's test this theory.
In minecraft, of course.
Going by what I've seen of Paul and what HBomberguy has cattily alluded to, I legitimately think that things which shake his sense of certainty in his beliefs scare and discomfit him.
That doesn’t make it art tho
@@sabrinatscha2554 Reacting to it by saying it isn't art makes it art.
There's this incredible lack of imagination wrapped up in the concept that art = painting and talent with painting = painting things realistically
Felix Gonzales Torres can make a pile of candy into a heartbreaking portrait of his dying lover. Graciela Carnivale can lock a bunch of art critics in a building and turn their escape into a metaphor for usurping military regimes. Agnes Denes can grow a field of wheat in the middle of New York City and suddenly every commuter passing by is reconnected with what they eat. Hell, even the stupid pretentious expensive immaterial shit is interesting.
It saddens me to think that someone can viscerally hate art.
Isn't claiming you know what "Real™" art is the act of being pretentious?
Dio Brando Yet pretty consistently those who claim art to have objective value are not artists themselves but those who consume art.
@Dio Brando because all art is subjective.
1. There is no hidden variable that makes art objectively good. Can you prove there is a quality all art should have that makes it objectively good.
2. Different genres/medians of art exist can you judge them all by the same metric or do adjust for the thing you are judging. If you adjust good job you’re being subjective.
3. If you’re operating on a “I know it when I see it.” Policy good job that’s an opinion. You’re operating on your feelings.
4 if you’re operating on general consensus that still isn’t objective. General popular opinions change over time. Just because it is popular or well regarded doesn’t mean it is objectively good. Your favorite anime is definitely hated by other people.
5. Why bother with art if it’s all subjective? Think for yourself you don’t have to like or respect all art. You don’t have to be so insecure about the art you enjoy and try to qualify it as objectively good. Just because it’s subjective doesn’t mean you can’t make arguments for why you don’t like or like something.
6. What about artists who create art why would they bother? People like creating things and feeling like their work has changed or evolved or appeals to certain groups of people. It’s called internal motivation.
@@blixer8384 Not an argument.
@@blixer8384 More like people who understand the fucking is/ought problem.
@@firetarrasque4667 The is/ought problem relates to the fact that you cannot based on reason and logic alone conclude how the world ought to be solely on how the world is. Which actually does more to prove my point about the qualities of art being subjective because you cannot conclude how the art ought to be based on how the art is.
Any conclusion on the quality of the art or how the art ought to be becomes a value statement and values are by their very nature subjective.
if we take what pjw says as fact (modern art in general sucks, older art is deeper/more aesthetically pleasing/less lazy) a major angle he misses is that older art has already been sifted through. older art that gets put into museums and textbooks and what gets considered "great art" is a fraction of what's left. he's not taking into account all the seemingly shitty art that surely existed alongside the "Greats."
(also he ignores that overlap between philosophy + art when he's considering the function of art)
He also fails to consider that the concept of the artist being the one providing the originality to the piece that he holds so dearly is a very recent one. Most art of all kinds in Europe (I'm not familiar with the state of affairs elsewhere, and most of what PJW considers good would be here anyways) up until the 19th century was made by commission by nobles. It's specially funny in music because up until the 60s, it was almost unheard of for acts to write their own music. Composers would write the music, and then multiple artists made recordings of it. Think about how many versions of Fly Me To The Moon or The Girl from Ipanema were recorded.
a n t i f a s u c c
Eric Taxxon yes we good at succ
Antifony Succtano
Please list all your musical references. There was some good stuff in there and I want to go through and listen to the albums. :)
Anthony "I used to have an edgy alternative channel where I made racist and all manners of horrible jokes, but I'm such a chickenshit that I deleted it right after PewDiepie said the N-word because I feared my bottom line would be affected" Fantano.
BOWL SHIT
Oh, Paul is so pretentious it was actually hard to watch those clips.
"sjws are ruining art" brb staring at all the shit the CIA did to ruin american art
WHY ARE YOU ALWAYS YELLING PAUL YOU HAVE A MICROPHONE!
It's because he heard that increasing volume makes people pay more attention to a recording... hmmm where did he get that from?
squidward
COMPRESSION HAS ROBBED PAUL OF DYNAMICS. INDIVIDUALITY IS BEING DROWNED OUT!
photos1.blogger.com/blogger2/7509/2360/1600/Calvin%20volume.0.jpg
To triggur libturds, duh.
Miley Cyrus decided to twerk exactly after her 4 producers forced her to read Derrida.
This is the best comment ever
Lmao
why does pjw always sound like someone doing a bad pjw impression
I love how in an effort to prevent a copyright claim, your videos look like an acid trip
it's beautiful, it's art.
I feel very limited as an artist. Every time i want to make something, I feel like I'm creating what everyone else created before me. That's why modern art is kind of uplifting and celebrates the human spirit for me, because it's an idea that I've never seen before.
Limited by talent? The problem is that many would prefer art to get better as time goes on. Modern art is garbage.
@@mmtot which is your opinion. I guess everyone on earth who disagrees with you is wrong? It's humbling to imagine art can be more than just a painting or a sculpture. Those are worthy mediums but what makes them intrinsically better or worse? Nothing measurable that's for sure. People called Piccasso garbage in his time.
@@IbraheemM98the first guy sound rude but he is not totally wrong, we all stand all the shoulder of giant whether we like it or not
70% of music, specifically with modern instruments like guitar, is written with pentatonic scale, add some major and minor scale and that is 90% of them. Does it stop people to create different peices of music across cultures? I don't think so, and so is art. Know the rules before break them, aquire better understanding of anatomy, composition, shape language can help you elevate your art and get knew ideas, hide your shorts coming by calling it "unique style" and cover it with "originality" doesn't help you growth on artistic journey
@@beaver_eater2447 Is every person who likes a piece of art that everyone else hates wrong to like it?
I see two possibilities: If your answer is "yes" then there must be something wrong with those people, psychologically, culturally they are broken or incomplete in some way that prevents them from having proper or good taste.
I assume your actual answer is "no" and you agree there's nothing wrong with how people feel about art. With that in mind my question now is, what's the point of taste at all, if there can be the "Greatest work of art in existence" and there will just be people who don't get it. People who are uncultured or too ignorant to understand the right way to experience things?
Does quality even exist when it comes to art? I don't think so. I think objective criticism of any kind of art is impossible because by it's nature it will depend on who experiences it. Just because a lot of cultures have similarities that doesn't prove that there's some grand ideal standard that all music must adhere to. There are sounds people tend to like and some sounds that people don't like. At that point, it's a popularity contest and popularity is not the same as objective.
@@IbraheemM98 the problems here is Taste vs Quality, which is a very different subjects.
Does universal taste exist in art? No, its doesn't, every individual is unique and the act of self-expression such as taste is various.
But quality? Absolutely, there will always be craftsmanship aspects with art, human brains is wired to determined value no matters the context. Knowing something bad from good and determine "how much effort to made this thing" is the foundation of trading and had been wired to our brains since cave men era.
In short, yes, i admire the human spirit and celebrate the freedom of art but with strong foundation. Im a civil engineering and architect, let me tell you no matter how stunning, elegant the structure look on the surfaces, it's the boring foundation beneath that made the building stand tall
How can anyone listen to PJW's horribly grating cadence? I'm a brit and no one talks like that here...
i think hes australian. doesnt make him any less annoying though
neckpeck nah he's from Sheffield. I know people form Sheffield, and although their accents are the same they don't talk in that weird, sneering, battering of vowels
I know right? That said, he's pretty fun to parody for when you need to do an fake-outraged conservative impression
i think whats even worse is the amount of synonymous adjectives he strings together to sound smarter..
He sounds like that one guy in your office who likes to point out that actually, it's not YOUR computer, it's the COMPANY's computer.
Gee it's almost like an economic system that commodifies literally everything will eventually turn music into a bland and marketable product
pjw complaining about everything being viewed through the lens of social justice while simultaneously viewing everything through the lens of social justice
In order to show why SJW art is so terribly awful, we have to discuss the idiotic mind set and moronic philosophy of the leftist SJW in order to supply context. Standard operational procedure in art criticism.
'Culture is supposed to be uplifting', says Paul in his fucking grey Victory T-shirt
Also Italian futurists were also explicitly anti-feminist and explicitly fascists.
a shame, really, since i like the art so much
So they were half-right.
Italian Futurism's relationship with feminism is more complicated than that, as a lot of the polemical use of misogynistic language was aimed less at actual women than the Romantic objectification of women in art and literature; in fact, the Futurist political platform explicitly agitated for the equality of men and women under the law and within Italian society, which led to a lot of Italian feminists actually aligning themselves with the Futurists early on. That said, there was always a syncretic, militarist edge to Futurism that made it especially compatible with Sansepolcrist fascism, and de facto leader Marinetti in particular became a huge Mussolini stan really quickly. That said, a substantial minority of Futurists were horrified by this, and either dropped out of political life entirely, went into exile, or allied themselves explicitly with anarchist, communist and socialist antifascists.
One of the funny aspects about the video series is that in the process of trying to denounce modern art, he ends up validating its existence by contextualizing its meaning within society and his own life. As much as he wants to claim that there's nothing of value within the pieces, they still gave him things to think and mull over about.
"Pop music is dumber now than it was when my target audience was young and all of the songs were about high school rings and drag racing fatalities."
Yeah I think the glasses prank is actually a fun example of how different types of art can really inspire us to ask questions. Like what is art anyway? Did the glasses become art when the visitors believed them to be so? If not, then does that mean author intent is required for something to qualify as a work of art? My conclusion is, joke's on you pranksters, you are artists now!
idk if you meant this as a joke but i genuinely do find it interesting too! I'm sure ill refine my opinions more but for now i believe as long as a single person considers something art, it is art and that's the end of it
Purple Burples, yes I am serious! I liked the prank and I think it doesn't insult modern art at all, in fact it adds to the ideas posed by this type of exhibit.
Your conclusion makes the point they were trying to show. There is no actual expertise or skill in this kind of art. Anyone can replicate it with no experience or talent at all.
@Jeewoong Chang How's your participation trophy collection going along?
@@kosog6584 whats your definition of art mr. No Fun Allowed?
But marxism isn't post modern
Do you honestly think the right wing alt right youtube channels care
qazwsxedc562 no, of course not
Marxists created post modernism, at least post modern philosophy.
+Brian Robbins Be specific. Who, and how?
From Wikipedia:
"Postmodern philosophy also has strong relations with the substantial literature of critical theory." "In sociology and political philosophy, the term critical theory describes the neo-Marxist philosophy of the Frankfurt School"
I think the reason why so much modern art is "bad" compared to older eras is because we don't preserve bad art as much as we do with good art. Another reason why it seems like this is because preserving any art is far more easier with the advent of the internet. You don't have to go through a lot to save that one image you made as a child anymore. You just have to take a photo with it and you have it for as long as you'd like. Upload it to the internet, and it's there forever. You have a short window of time to delete it before it spreads, and that window gets much shorter the more famous you become.
Tbf, there are legit art movements whose whole entire thing is to blur the line of what is art.
I mean, that's literally what the dadaists of the 1920s were trying to do. So, yes. The work is meaningless. That's the point. The question they pose is not about meaning or the piece being good art, but raising the question if its still art.
The sheer fact that the infamous urinal is quoted as an example of non-art is insanely ironic. It was literally made to piss off art snobs
@@Hugglebuns Fountain is honestly genius because pissing you off about whether it's art or not is literally why it's art; that was the point
like it's a real "god fucking damn it, fuck you you're right it *is* art" moment; kind of want to shake the guy's hand and shake him by the shoulders at the same time, I'm genuinely impressed
This video showed me that modern art is actually really cool.
It's not and will never be.
@@baki_bold your opinion
@@trench900 clearly... 🤷
@@baki_bold You hating it makes it cool. The more you hate it, the cooler it becomes.
It’s not though! Wake up!
"Does something not make sense to you? Blame the Postmodernists!"
He's not even right wing
Which is a nihilist, marxist, liberal conspiracy (never mind those those 3 philosophies/ideologies are entirely contradictory)
globoxsas Versus people like John Oliver?
James Morgan and cultural Marxists. Keep up soy boy.
blacktigerpaw1 where has John Oliver talked about postmodernism?
PJW on modern art: it's too out there! Reign it in, just do portraits you hacks!
PJW on modern music: it's too similar! Do something unusual you hacks!
*this is hyperbole for a joke
he's the type of guy that thinks pop music is stupid and experimental music is "just noise" so he listens to nothing but "the wall" by pink floyd for all of eternity.
They're both extremes, so why shouldn't they be balance out? I really don't understand the premise of your argument.
the problem is that he's claiming both extremes without even _hinting_ at the idea of a compromise. the whole series relies on extremes because if he admitted some amount of nuance into his views, his audience might see some of the cracks.
If you're a big enough (wo)/man you can be willing to look into your opinions for flaws--it's not sign of 'weakness' or anything, it's a sign that you're confident enough in your view that you have faith that it'll withstand a critical look. If you can't (and he _really_ can't) do that, it suggests that the view is held in stubbornness and/or insecurity.
I hate my username I get your point, but you can still like music if it’s criticizing something you like. Music isn’t one dimensional.
WhatFearFears listen to more modern music i bet you will find something you like
This video made me immediately want to go out and visit a modern art museum, so thank you for that. Also the story behind Untitled (Perfect Lovers) broke my heart.
On another level, it's just a resurfacing of the "degenerate art" concept. PJW is opposed to art which he presumes to be politicized, though many pieces he presents are clearly apolitical or ambiguous pieces. Yet the counterexamples he presents are nakedly political art pieces with unmistakable messages.
The totalitarian sees the purpose of art as the communication of a clear, unambiguous message which affirms a positive view of national history and spirit, and which aggrandizes figures or events of political importance. This view of art is incompatible with abstraction and ambiguity, and in both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, it resulted in the destruction of many art objects.
What's ironic is that PJW fails to recognize that most of the abstract art he refers to here would not have been accepted in the Soviet Union. The very definition of socialist realism he shows contradicts the purpose and presentation of the pieces which he claims are Frankfurt indoctrination.
To the totalitarian, ambiguity is the enemy, and onto the unknown contained within an art piece can be projected every negative intention the observer believes his enemies possess. Art which is not affirmative propaganda, which asks questions without answering them, and which contains no morals is immediately suspect.
What's ironic? Some of the criticisms Paul levels at art would likely be shared by the Frankfurt school, and even by Soviet censors, and the art he criticizes as degenerate is the natural consequence of free speech within a capitalist framework.
He also constantly rambles about cultural marxism, which is an old dogwhistle for jews.
@Dio Brando Yes, you're actually right. I do know a bunch of far righters intimately. I know you're trying to be coy, but I know what they talk like because I've been friends with them for years.
Crap, it's almost 7 Sargons.
Ironically, PJW seems to agree with the freaking Frankfurt School themselves about the declining of "art and culture".
Nanna Leifa its like mra's failing to realise thier problems are caused by patriarcy and sexism (and also capitalism).
Also most right wingers confuse art and culture with traditions.
I think most MRAs do realize that, they just typically think about it in different terms. Feminism doesn't have a monopoly on the concept of "patriarchy" you know... you can talk about oppression and injustice without being a feminist.
Data.Complex ⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ “You can recognise patriarchy while not caring about women’s rights”
Yeah technically you’re right, you can be just ok with women being second class citizens.
I can almost feel the spit hitting my face whenever Paul talks.
He's got a really unpleasant voice. Even if he was reading a restaurant menu out loud it would sound unnecessarily aggressive.
Nice, that’s the closest a person would ever speak to you.
I think he is doing a "loud guy" voice because he thinks it sounds masculine.
Its masculine?
Watson seems to think it is. Reality has little to do with anybody who thinks that Cultural Marxism is some sort of long-running Commie plot and not a mode of cultural critique.
I hated modern art for a long time because I didn't understand it. Then I read "Breakfast of Champions" by Kurt Vonnegut and got to the part about Rabo Karabekian describing his painting and something suddenly clicked. Now I still don't understand most modern art but I also accept that not understanding it is okay and not understanding the meaning of something doesn't mean it is without meaning.
i felt similarly until a high school professor explained duchamp's fountain to my class. in recent years I've mellowed even more and accepted that literally anything can be art and i don't have the authority (or anyone really) to to say it isn't
One of the most humane themes throughout Vonnegut's work is basically, "it's okay to feel stupid, it's okay to fail", and coming from a serious literary person, that means a ~whole~ lot. Obviously there's a lot more in his work, but that's always the intimate throughline I got from Kurt.
As an art student and an artist myself (even though I still roam on the figurative imagery realm), I'd say that art goes beyond understanding something or not. The very doubt or confusion that the contact with a work may induce is, in itself, a worthy experience. And resonating with something does not require the rationalization of such thing, it may (and generally will) just happen :)
@Lord Tachanka ok edgelord you do that
Purple Burples ok edgelord you do that
i know i'm months late to this, but the one to do with the bed, it was made because the artist behind it when through a deep depression, and she saw this bed as a 'hey, it can't control me anymore' type of thing, basically stepping out of her bed and over a hurdle in her life.
for many, art isn't just the piece but the history of why the piece was made and even the artist's history.
thats what i personally love about art, why was this painting made, what was the inspiration of it, if this work is based off depression why did the artist depict it this way, are they or someone they know going through it?
i feel like to many people just take the face value of art and discard the making and the reasoning behind it. I love artists wh just give a big 'middle finger' to 'pretentious twats' like the one you were analyzing in the video.
An artist we studied last year in college literally made a 'middle finger' sculpture and had a little plaque placed under it saying 'this is art. fuck you if you think otherwise' half joking half serious. I love this kind of stuff.
Ironically, Paul's basically Theodor Adorno but a right wing conspiracy theorist with a sheffield accent.
and he likes jazz
Meh, there's some very significant differences.
He's Adorno? You trolling us? In what way is he not the opposite of Adorno?
He's actually on the cusp of Adorno's critique of modern mass art, that which we today refer to as culture. They break off there because PJW understands none of the nuance of The Culture Industry, which he replaces with adverbs and empty rhetoric to describe things that he doesn't like. For one example, at 15:08 PJW complains about the sexualization of culture. Adorno also complained about the sexualization of culture, but because it only served to sexually provoke people and capture their interest, thereby dehumanizing real romantic interactions and taking us further from the most biologically normal interaction possible. Later on in that exact quote PJW opens up more parallels between his own argument and Adorno's because he suggests that an ideal art would open up intrigue (positive correlation with Adorno's ideal of critical reflection), lust for knowledge (mixed/unclear correlation with Adorno and Horkheimer's critique of enlightenment), and beauty.
I think the intellectual poverty of PJW's argument is ultimately that his "cultural critique" comes with no distinguishable aesthetic theory: while Adorno attempts to disambiguate, even in The Culture Industry which was meant to be purely critique, the difference between works of style and real great works (those from which form and even style emanate), PJW knows only how to bang his fists on the table and blame the Jews because things are bad now. If he knew anything about postmodernism he would've known that Adorno's critique of modernism is just a much more coherent version of the same argument he wants to make.
UmYeeaahh: delighted to be talking about Adorno on UA-cam (I've made attempts in the past). However , I don't think the similarities you're describing qualify as PJW being on the cusp of Adorno. Your average man on the street (PJW) can see that mainstream art is sexualised and inconsistent with common human ideals concerning love. Recognising the same symptoms does not qualify as sharing the same philosophical ideas. They' diverge on every entry point. On the specific level, Adorno proposes that immenant critique must be applied to each artwork individually (not going to try defining immenant critique here). PJW doesn't see the need for this. He begins at the generalisation and immediately skips to what he sees as the cause (which Eric and others in this thread have already pointed out are twofold, with one contradicting the other). Secondly, Adorno ascribed many issues with mainstream culture to the expediency of the mode of production. These are of course capitalistic, so already at the outset he's completely at odds with PJW'S supposed core values. This is the most surface level Adorno. It's ridiculous to say they share similar philosophic thought when one doesn't actually philosophize.
“Matisse is what happens when Social Justice Warriors get ahold of art and we gamers have to fight back”
HTR Adams Bro it's about ethics in post-impressionist journalism
"Matisse is what happens when Social justice warriors get ahold of art"
yes, please, i'll have more of that then, thanks
I don't disagree with him about pop music; I've been into music my whole life and I can't enjoy it for similar reasons. But I would never claim that that's an objective reality and not just my opinion-- it's pretty hilarious that he criticizes others (e.g. people who like modern art) as being "pretentious" and then goes on to say that pop music and modern art are objectively bad and that the people who like them are therefore wrong to do so. Thumbing your nose at other people's taste while claiming yours is objectively superior... Hmm yeah, that is about as pretentious as you can get.
Where he really loses me, though, is the idea that any of this has to do with the left, Marxism, etc.... If there's any mechanism that it ACTUALLY makes sense to point at as an objective cause in the tendencies of pop music, it is commercialization and corporatization, with art and music becoming commodities for investors to profit from instead of being creative works for their own sake. Yes, PJW-- the marketing and success of shitty shadow-written pop music is... Gasp... *capitalism's fault!* Which I imagine is why it's so vital for right-wingers to come up with a boogie-straw-man to blame it on-- "cultural Marxism." Because its more "realistic" and "objective" to center your critique around a made up phenomenon that does not represent any material interest, self-identified social force, ideology, or movement. Every time someone uses that phrase I want to laugh out loud, because it instantly shows that you are someone who just parrots propaganda they hear from some reactionary "intellectual" rather than thinking for yourself and getting your information from legitimate, direct, and/or unbiased sources. Why does it prove that? Because the only people on planet Earth who talk about "cultural Marxism" are extreme right-wingers desperate to blame all of the ills of society on something to do with Marxism, even if it's something which (as they describe it) has absolutely no connection to the writings of Karl Marx or any mainstream Marxist theorists. It's the most blatant, vapid attempt to discredit Marxism without having to actually know thing one about it, let alone address any of its points. But that seems to be the modus operandi of channels like his... You know, this is probably what most led me to the radical left. Every right-wing and pro-capitalist ideology (including liberalism) seems to share a tendency to simply attempt to indoctrinate people into following them, whether by manipulating their emotions (fear, anger, disfranchisement, loneliness, etc.), or spreading misinformation, or planting the seeds of false assumptions as axioms which are beyond questioning. The libertarian left (anarchists, libertarian Marxists, and communalists among others) are the only ones who I ever felt made it a priority to train people's critical faculties, to encourage them to question dogma and doctrine even within the left, and to develop the tools necessary to come to their own conclusions and to form their own beliefs. This kind of critical pedagogy is marginalized by the right, because they WANT people to be obedient to authority, to accept their assumptions without questioning, and to fail to see the injustices and failings of the system they're pushing, because it's about defending a system that benefits an elite minority.
I have the same problem with authoritarian leftists, such as Leninists. But at least many of them are well-intentioned. The right is running out of arguments. They went from "capitalism lifts all ships and is good for everyone, even the poor," to "well, there's no alternative that's as great" to "there is literally no alternative." And now the best they can come up with is fantasies like "All you 'cultural Marxists' just want to destroy Western civilization!" Or one of my personal favorites: "If you express any amount of care or empathy for others, you're just an 'SJW.'" What a toxic sentiment that meme is. I think it displays an incredible capacity for psychological projection that these people literally cannot conceive of how you'd argue for a decent society for other people than yourself for any other reason than because it makes you feel righteous, or because you want people to think you are... It's sad really. I don't fully blame them; there has been a powerful campaign to indoctrinate people with these (lack of) values and ideas pretty much since the post-WWII era (especially since the 60s-70s, when the Trilateral Commission and other elite groups were worried about the "crisis of democracy" and the "failure of the institutions responsible for the indoctrination of the young" (their words, not mine-- Google Crisis of Democracy by the TLC). When people start reading what these POSes actually say amongst themselves about democracy and the role of the public, then they'll start to understand where cultural myths and talking-points like "cultural Marxism" come from. The ruling class is very class conscious and thinks in terms of "public myth-making," "controlling the public mind," "creating greater worker insecurity" in order to more easily control the working class (Alan Greenspan literally said that was his greatest success)... Anyone who spews these stupid defenses of a ruling class that doesn't give a damn about them either doesn't know this or does know and is purposefully deceiving people in hopes that that kind of sycophancy will land them a spot among the elites.
21:11 Did he really just call colonialism, misogyny and racism “imaginary injustice”?
@@vinnilligoose123 Colonialism is natural, every nation and every race does it. Some do it better than others.
@@rozzgrey801 sexual assault, murder, infanticide, parental neglect and abandonment are all naturally occurring things, does that make them not injustices anymore?
@@isaacccol6754 Those are all bad things which should be actively discouraged, but colonialism is cool, in fact, the more I study it, the better colonialism is shaping up as the best thing that human cultures all do. To colonise everywhere makes us human.
@@rozzgrey801 right, but my point is that sometimes bad things are natural. Just because something is natural, that doesn’t make it good or just. In your original comment, you resisted the idea that colonialism is unjust on the basis that it is natural. But as you and I both agree, being natural doesn’t make something correct or good.
You can believe colonialism is good, I’m not going to change your mind on that, my point is that justifying this on the basis that it’s natural is silly
This might be the marxist brainwashing talking but this video is pretty great. I really dug how you wove the visuals and music into your point in a way. Though I guess you also kinda need relaxing soundscape music to contrast Paul's droning voice. Dude sounds like he's always lecturing a puppy who's just shat on the carpet.
ThorHighHeels sometimes I feel most right-wing figures tend to argue in this fashion for a reason.
The PJW's brazilian counterpart, Nando Moura, always speaks like that. As if he was scolding a child for not doing their chores or something.
Actually, both right and left wings to this at the same time imo, it's just that Nando makes it particularly obvious he is talking like that to diminish his oponent while making him look like a living god.(he already has the hair of a god tho. it's just so majestic!)
ThorHighHeels cool to find you here
No one's brainwashing you, this video has nothing to do with marxism. The majority of what sophmoric reactionaries like PJW ascribe to marxism have absolutely nothing to do with Marx's theories. You should do a little experiment and actually read the communist manifesto which won't take you very long, are you a free thinker or are you going to let other people make up your mind for you.
I know that lol. it was a dig at Paul's expense because everything he hates is due to CULTURAL MARXISM in his eyes and that to me is funny.
wooosh
"modern art liberals are acting like fighting against the mainstream, while they are the mainstream"
Later
Also, buy my new "Conservatism is the new counterculture shirts"
It seems like Paul's sense of Irony was consumed by his *massive lips*
boy's got some nice dsl
m a s s i v e l i p s
uh yeah no lol
1917th BenisBrigade, iMagINe mY shOcK
To be fair, the size of his lips is i think exaggerated by his lighting.
A good (fictional) example of how modern art affects people is Wilson Fisk’s white, kind of textured canvas that looks similar to the wall he’d be forced to look at while his father beat his mother, and later the wall of his cell. Most of modern art is how it affects the viewer of that art. What does this picture remind you of? What does that mean? How do those things affect your life?
Does anybody else think PJW needs to put more emphasis on his power words
His issue is that he does that _every single word_ which makes it lose its effect.
6:31 Beethoven was actually the first to introduce lyrics in a prominent symphony (a big no-no until then), leading to the creation of a new genre - choral symphonies.
Paul must be very distressed that Othello's main character was black. Shakespeare was modern aht.
It's hilarious because most of his complaints about modern theatre are all things shakespeare did. I doubt Paul's ever read a work of fiction outside of the occasional Andy McNab novel. Or maybe the british children's seiries Cherub. I get the sense that Cherub has indirectly made a lot of people more right wing tbh.
othello was a moor (ie moroccan), not black.
shakespeare did none of the things done in modern art, if you think he did that shows your own unfamiliarity. you probably don't even know that all the actors he used were male and that this is the reason he makes "female" characters dress as men.
". you probably don't even know that all the actors he used were male and that this is the reason he makes "female" characters dress as men."
Doesn't matter who plays them they're female in the play.
The whole deal of whether Moors were "black" or not is a bit of a disconnect between how different groups see race, I think. In the US, there seems to be a pretty dichotomous black-white view of race (One-Drop policy, etc.), whereas other regions might see it as more gradual or having different categories (Latin-American categories, for example). So you sometimes see Americans arguing that southern-Italians or Greeks are "black" because they have a certain natural tan or something, whereas a European might argue otherwise, perhaps. In the end, there really isn't an objective conclusion on this, as racial categories are historically and culturally situated and embedded. This is especially difficult when you then start applying modern, variable racial categories to a different historical period, where the racial categories will carry different qualifiers and requirements. So, whether Moors were "black", Huns were "Asian", or whether Ancient Egyptians were "black" or "middle eastern" depends a lot on what exactly those categories entail, and that again depends on who is asking that question to begin with.
is it just me
or is the way pjw keeps jutting his face toward you several times per sentence extremely aggravating
it keeps giving me a fight response
0:49
what did he just say??? why did he pronounce urinal like that??? pjw is easily one of the strangest people on earth.
"You're never going to make bleeding from your genitals not gross."
Oh my god he's literally fourteen years old.
@67 SS everything can be art. Go cry about it.
@67 SS you're the one who makes the claim that there are criteria by which things can be art or not. But go off. (Actually don't because I really don't care.)
Paul Joseph Watson reminds me of the "England Prevails" television personality from V for Vendetta.
yOU CAN"T OPEN A VIDEO LIKE THAT
I'm in TEARS holy shit
"pop music is dull and repetitive" you're projecting, bro
Epic roast, both of Paul and me
That was one of my favorite anti-PJW videos ever. Or was it a two parter? I think it was a two parter.
Now kiss
Dolce Luxe an example of bad taste. Paul Joseph Watson seems to like Hopsin tho.
Society changes over time PJW. So you dont like the new music Hank Hill...
To be fair, it's more of a refutation than a "roast". As you barely figure for more than 10 seconds, I fail to see why it's about you (full disclosure: I haven't yet seen your diatribes, but I hope you don't bandy lazy and dubious terminology like "cultural marxism" around).
There's also the fact that "modern art" is so diverse that it is impossible to place it into one category.
@tubetardism 20/20 Yes and I would say that postmodern art overlaps modernist art for about 15 years, from the early 60s to the late 70s and then takes over almost entirely after that. But Paul can't tell the difference.
You mean garbage? Sure.
@@AbaddonTheDestroyer
Define modern art.
@@RaeIsGaee Already did. Garbage.
@@AbaddonTheDestroyer
So do you consider Nighthawks to be garbage?
looking back at it, i just think hes mad that he actually has to think critically when consuming contemporary art. people like this just want messages and themes spoonfed to them in a way that doesnt offend them
Patricia, I already liked your work, but just mentioning Music for 18 Musicians says some very deep, profound things about your character that has elevated this like into a love.
I really enjoyed this video.
You made me realise why right wingers hate modern art, because it doesn't fit within the constraints of capitalist thought. At least I hope that's what the moral was.
Yeah you're right.
Too bad me, most right wingers, and most not-right wingers (were do you live that contempt for modern art is partisan????? - or class-tied - or education-tied, for that matter) hate modern art because it lacks what gives traditional art value. Humans create art because it is of value to them. Modern art is of value to very few people, and for very fucked up reasons and very different reasons traditional art is of value to almost everybody.
And it's methodolically self-defeating. When you, instead of just accepting the obvious and often clearly expressed reasons why somebody does something, use psychoanalysis (a flawed method to being with) to find "hidden" reasons for why somebody does something, it is even easier for everybody else to just make up reasons why you do this.
Defenders of postmodern art hate critices of postmodern art because they are afraid to be found out as frauds and pretenders. Easy eh? I don't even need to make up a silly conspiracy theory (this comment is Paulception?) to argue for that. Is that the way you want to conduct discourse? Okay, fine with me.
Do you really believe PJW is the smartest person you are up against? In that case Bannon's 50 year Reich just might happen after all.
Future here: it never happened. Bannon and the rest of them are mired in legal problems. Right wingers don't like modern arts because they only appreciate concrete things, not conceptual things.
@Patricia_Taxxon well Snoop Dogg made the point how rap music sounds the same no 2 rappers sounded the same in the 90s. Biggie and 2 Pac were completely different.
So he's subconsciously arguing in favour of a labour theory of value?
Huh. Interesting.
Assuming the space of all logic possiblities contains only two theories about the value of labor. That's a bit of a stretch, isn't it?
Here is a right wing dumb on modern art from myself:
Modern Art (as in opposed to "traditional art", which is still produced in modernity), is of no value except for that is allows to show off that you money to waste on literal shit, and creating esoteric circles.
It is considered simplisticly as "without value", because it lacks all the features that give traditional art value. It serves a completely different purpose.
So it has value for certain reasons. And it lack values for certain other reasons, aims which can not be accomplished without proper craftsmenship. (Beauty, communitcating meaning on a very "deep" level, deep in the sense of deeply internalized culture or biological instinct).
Guys... guys... it were a joke.
Arthur O'Brien Arthur O'Brien So I can draw a bunch of the letter y on a blank canvass and call it “art.” The Ys would symbolize the many choices that we make in our lives. If you start at the base of the y, you will eventually reach a two-way intersection. This is to symbolize choice. I think for my next project I will splatter feces on a blank canvas. Then I will come up with some bullshit philosophical meaning for the piece. I will be such a great artist.
You totally could aye. You could do both those things. You could refer to both of them as works of art that you created (you don't need the quote marks when you say it either). Whether you'd be a great artist or not is debatable.
The first one ('y' characters on an otherwise blank canvas) for me, sounds like you've at least thought about it enough to have cemented the idea in your head that 'forks in the road' are interesting concepts, the 'y' character looks like a fork in the road, and you think it's worth talking about choice, perhaps in moral terms, but maybe even in the sense of what it means to have choice under a capitalist system. I could add to your reasoning that the lower case 'y' looks like a biased choice (one road is clearly a branch, while the other is straight on) while the upper case 'Y' looks like it's an evenly spread bet which road to take.
I actually really like that idea. Not sure I'd buy the piece, but I'd enjoy talking about it.
On the second one, you could call it art for sure, but if the meaning you came up with was known to all, understood to all, internalised by all, as "bullshit", it wouldn't be "good" to anyone viewing it I suspect.
I actually suggest you do the 'y' one. See if you can come up with a decent name for it. Think about what the choice of canvas material, ink or paint, font, colour, spacing, etc. says about the message you want to get across and run with it. It could be great.
Don't do the shit one though. Not unless you can make it represent something meaningful to you (or someone else I suppose).
*listening to the whole thing about pop music* wot has that to do with the left, lol?
EDM is legit so hard to make and much more difficult than just DJing at some 1980's party
"Conceptual art also reflects trends in society, culture, and politics." This is different from literally all art made ever... how, exactly?
Maybe I am wrong, but to me it sounded like PJW's point was that it is bad that modern art tries to be topical and make some commentary about the world around it, and somehow older art is timeless or somesuch nonsense.
Graff Fhe So why even have the branding of “conceptual art” if all art alludes to current trends?
yeah like
not to sound like the joker, but we do be living in a society
kind of impossible for the things we make to not be affected by society, culture, and politics
Most people in Boston (the victims) hated the movie about the bombing mainly because it merged all real life hero’s into Marky Mark and people were already mad about his previous comments where he claimed that he could have stopped 9/11.
"More vulgar more than any other time in human history"
Dude must have never heard of heavy metal....
(And I guess grunge, rock and roll and disco by extension)
Don’t forget sea shanties. Most of which were fairly overt metaphors for having sex with prostitutes.
Plus an entire genre of medieval art was graphic and horrifying depictions of hell. Plenty of ‘classical’ art is fucked up
the thing I honestly don't get is this contradiction: "cultural marxists drain all the individualism out of pop music" and "the standards in art went slowly away and all that is left is selfexpression" how can one belief both of these things to be true, modern art being all about expressing ideas and less about showing off skill is the opposite to what they think is happening to pop-music.
The Eno background music is so lovely that it totally changes the mood of the video. Whenever you or PJW make a joke it has the complete opposite effect when combined with the music. Not necessarily a bad thing, just...different. I kinda...like it?
The visuals were very engaging. Usually I get distracted and go do something else as I listen, but I couldn't take my eyes off the video on this one
Constant movement.
it's mesmerising, looks like saul bass rubbing his eyes really hard
it was eye catching but felt more distracting than anything, good video though.
lol paul joseph watson has no understanding of what pop culture actually entails. he should probably read some of the original reactions to stuff like waltz, jazz...
Modern art is garbage
...Isn't Swift, like a fairly prolific songwriter? I remember her being credited for a surprising amount of stuff outside of songs she's the 'face' of.
I don't' exactly care for most of her work, there's a fairly personal vibe to many of her songs I like.
Famously Imogen Heap criticised her as being a hand-puppet for major label songwriters and producers, and in response Swift turned up at her door and asked to write a song with her. Completely changed her mind once they worked together. I don’t hold it against Imogen too much though ‘cause her album ‘Speak for Yourself’ is beautiful and one of my favourite Pop albums ever.
Yeah, but people like PJW don't care, he must think that some Frankfurt School's students are secretly writing Taylor's songs to brainwash the listeners into marxism or some idiotic nonsense like that
i think cobain would break a guitar at pjw's head, if he met him.
Paul would hate Cobain if he happened to be in his thirties in the ninetes.
Cobain the third wave feminist who was himself a post-modernist painter?
You don't say.
"Cuck" is a word that curses anyone who uses it unironically with the inability to ever be taken seriously again.
Brie Russell Not to mention his weird baby/fetus thing. That was weird.
Sclapione Rocco not a milimeter?
27:23 I don't know what sorts of roles these people want for Black actors in British historical dramas, but Paul makes it very clear that the thinks there were no Black people in England before... when, I wonder? The 1960s?
We can see in historical paintings from England and elsewhere in Europe that people of African descent have been around in much of Western Europe for a lot longer than Paul seems to think.
Going back to watch these years later and I'd forgotten just how cool your collage style is for video essays, Patty. That's some good design there.
Capitalism does lead to making art more bland. Not that Watson would ever think about that.
a hellenic pagan it does, yeah. Artists depend on patronage from the average person and in order to reach the maximum number of patrons you need to make the least offensive, most accessible work.
J Baron thank you
Only if that’s what’s profitable, popular, or both. That isn’t a fault of capitalism, it’s the market it’s adhering too. By the way, if we’re talking about art that isn’t music (because that’s what you’re referring to) then it has no/little capital because it’s one person using supplies to create a 2D image or 3D sculpture.
Dusk Legend or a performance, that being said, I refer you to J Baron's comment in this thread.
Its not capitalism fault the masses have shit taste. The market only adheres
I noticed Lindybeige was like this, too, whinging about culture and society with this indignant attitude that everyone is a moron and they've seen the truth.
"LISTEN TO ME, FOLLOWERS! I AM IN THE KNOW!"
I think that's the bit that pisses me off, that in a world of pure chaos we have people with the sheer balls to claim they have special knowledge and know what is going on with everything. Life is everyone figuring things out, a lot of those who claim special knowledge just dream of being looked up to, I feel.
Yeah, it's one of the most important life lessons: be wary of people who pretend they have all the answers. People who are actually knowledgeable will usually emphasize that their perspective is still limited, that the world is incredibly complex and that there's a whole universe of things we don't understand. Unfortunately, nuance doesn't translate very well to uninformed people who interpret the expert's avoidance of simple answers as 'dancing around the bush' and an admission of ignorance. And so they turn to the Paul Joseph Watson types, the ones who speak in an authoritative tone and tell them what's what in a manner that's reassuring and doesn't leave a lot of room for confusion. It's the standard approach of right-wing commentators and it's fucking depressing to see how effective it is. People need to learn that acknowledging the limits of your knowledge and the possibility that you're wrong are not signs of weakness but absolutely crucial to maintaining any sort of honest intellectual position.
Lindybeige's slow leaning towards the right was really disapointing
Oh it wasn't a slow lean, unfortunately. If you look at his website a lot of his views were quite openly on there. That if you hated people hunting you were some miserable know nothing, legalise cigarettes for under 18s to cull stupid children and he called himself a "reasonable independent" which usually is coded language for "I am a conservative but find being called one tiresome as it makes me too easy to be quantified by those who oppose my views".
You guys must be new to youtube. I don't even watch Lindybeige, but I've known for years that he is pals with Sargon. The now disgraced HannibaltheVictor made video responses to him
1:48 ok I just gotta say this: PJW look here really make him look like a caricature of those "angry feminist" he hates so much
I thought the whole point of art was that there were no rules. I mean, I work in multiple traditional and semi- traditional mediums, and honestly I don't look down on modern-modern artists. I am not going to view an abstract or minimalistic sculpture's work as lesser when put in comparison to another artists painting. Also, the point of being quiet in a gallery or an exhibition is to be respectful of others so they can observe and appreciate the pieces being featured, not to attempt to look more sophisticated or more intellectually superior.
''Modern art breaks capitalism'' hmmm no, the opposite in fact. Something worthless being sold for a million is pure capitalism.
I think the point would be that *ALL* art is something worthless being sold for millions ov dollars.
It breaks it in the sense that it goes against one principle: the value of a commodity should be in proportion to the resources(time/manpower/substance).
Art is just an idea manifesting trough an object. (Music is an idea composed of sounds, a painting is an idea manifested trough strokes/pixels) the value of a painting isnt in its literal molecules of paint on a canvas, its the idea
In selling what you might consider worthless for so much money the message is simply things are worth whatever people think theyre worth. Capitalism kinda tells us otherwise, that things (and people) do have a set value. but to somebody out there that piece of trash IS worth all that money.
And to me that makes sense! If youre my age and like videogames consider we buy them at 60 dollars happily if we feel were getting that value. But some people think its a waste of money and dont considers games art. Does that mean they arent? Not at all.
Im hoping my explanation made a bit of sense i feel like it was a bit of word spaghetti and i dont want to make anybody angry
C. Ortega No, modern orthodox schools of economics that have advocated for free markets explicitly support the subjective theory of value, which posits that value is in the eye of the beholder, because it is. Values are not set in markets, they constantly change to meet demands. The fact that things have price tags to begin with is a matter of convenience for exchange; it is not to imply objective value.
Marxism, on the other hand, and most anarchist philosophies at that, purports the labor theory of value, positing that goods gain their value from the labor needed to produce them, what you and Patricia claimed free markets support, when it is ironically the reverse.
Of course Arrival is offensive to pjw, it has a female lead and calls out militaristic, isolationist politics and presents open cooperation and communication as the only way to move forward into the future.
TalysAlankil
You hoist open communication and interaction up as self-evident moral truths, but I honestly see no evidence for this. Much the opposite, in fact, this kind of interaction usually only leads to the militarism that you rightly decry, followed shortly thereafter by war and ruination. The support of isolationism stems from a preemptive measure to combat the future potentiality of what we now have; big countries like America and China and Russia getting into big dick measuring contests with each other for no real reason.
What? Communication and Interaction is the reason of the conflicts between Russia, China, and America??????? Excuse me?
cyncynshop If Teddy Roosevelt didn’t begin trying to make the US a military power, against the wishes of the founding fathers, with the desire to make America the worlds police, we definitely wouldn’t have the kind of trouble we do now. The second we decided to start sticking our noses into other countries shit instead of just keeping to ourselves, we were doomed.
Because isolationism and keeping to themselves worked so well for China in the centuries before 1900 ...
siukong Indeed. If only Britain had decided not to conquer countries for money, China wouldn’t have been in a problematic situation. (You’re blaming the victim, mate. Try again.)
Does anybody remember when pjw but a photo of a trans person, but it was actually bjorks back up flute player. PJW cherry picks hoping no one will check.
also as someone who has been a teenager i promise you that the first time you hear good music is not less pleasurable than later hearings of it.
Totally unrelated, but why does Paul's mouth bother me so much? I can't put my finger on it; I just know I hate looking at it. (No, not because it's constantly spewing out bullshit.)
He's a lizard in a badly fitted skin suit
It's his pouty bottom lip as he bitches about things he doesn't fucking understand, in typical right-wing fashion.
It's the lipstick. Makes you wanna kiss him. It turns the friggin frogs gay.
slimkt its because they are uneven, very fleshy, and too large at the bottom. The mind finds it unnatural and therefore leads to you thinking its ugly or bothering. I agree.
Paul's lips look as though he has been punched in the face recently. Which wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.
Dude, Eno and Aphex Twin as soundtrack? Sold.
I don't think they're interested in discovering better art; their purpose is to expose the perceived 'other' and have a constant antagonist (the Deep State, Muslim Refugees) to give them a sense of righteous indignation.
From Stan Walker to Taylor Swift on top of the recent popularity of K/J pop and abstract groups such as The Living Tombstone, there's more choice than ever before due to ease of access and variety of songs.
ughhhhhhhhhhh I always feel like I gotta take a bath after listening to his deranged homeless-man-yells-at-pigeons rants.