Destiny Reacts to Is Philosophy Tube "Is Art Meaningless" w/ EFAP
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 лип 2024
- Subscribe & like for daily Destiny clips
►Timestamps:
00:00 - the subjectivity of art, the meaning of art
22:56 - What is art?
29:42 - British moment, trolling in art
44:24 - Intention in art, functioning vs artistic
57:22 - Destiny explains PT's point, intention in art
01:05:11 - Interpreting art
01:30:00 - Art for entertainment, intellectualizing art
01:41:54 - Destiny drops a hot take (Star Wars vs Dune)
01:57:15 - Does the author's intent matter, Tolkien, JK Rowling, is it Canon?
02:12:00 - Valuing art, creating hype
02:25:16 - Destiny vs Destiny The Game
02:38:23 - "Getting it" in art
02:51:21 - Interpreting art vs the author's intent
03:02:56 - Destiny's opinion on Pop Philosophy
I love you（｀・ω・）ゞ
---------------------------------------------------
This channel is a fan-made channel and not affiliated with Destiny
#Destiny
---------------------------------------------------
Feeling extra generous today?
Consider donating ^-^
Feeding America:secure.feedingamerica.org/sit...
Find your local food bank: findfoodsupport.withgoogle.com/
Find more charities to help: www.givewell.org/ - Ігри
Shocking Revelation: Hosts of Podcast called "Every Frame a Pause" frequently pause the video they're watching to comment on it. More to follow as the story develops.
DAMN respect for the timestamps brah
this was frustrating because it felt like the guys were more interested in stopping every other sentence just to disagree with every tiny thing abigail said and destiny was the only one there trying to make an honest effort to actual interpret what she was saying in context, is just like that video where the minority report makes fun of tim pools song
That’s what efap is: Every, Frame, a, Pause
Yeah that’s what they do
@@roguewasbanned4746 exactly. Yeah, it's a long form dissection of a different user's video essay, that's kind of just what the content literally /is/.
Took the words right out of my mouth. I'm not even a PT fan lately
@@johncoppinger2241 Like 10% actual substance and 90% waffle. While "dissect" is the safe word to use. Its more aptly described as a circlejerk.
I disagree, destiny is still a girl's name, despite your bad faith arguments.
wow, they truly do pause every frame
Yep
Art is ideas communicated by media.
So a good traditional painting of a landscape coveys the idea of a landscape (among other subtler things), whereas a bad painting of a landscape might not convey the idea of "this is a beautiful landscape" as well.
This principle applies to modern art too. Its all still art, just some of it conveys its ideas very badly, or is so nebulous that it can kinda hide in its vaguery.
thats like your opinion MAAAAN. Did you know a monkey did a finger painting and it sold for 25k? Other people clearly think thats high art. buahahha
@@Yor_gamma_ix_bae it’s mostly money laundering
Paintings are an easy example, what meaning does ambient music have?
@@iz2333 instead of a chaotic, naturally occurring soundscape, we try to replace it with order.
Does anyone know the book Destiny is talking about around 1:13:00 ?
I keep coming up with a play about Rudyard Kipling and his son who went missing in WW1. Not sure if that's it, no discriptions talk about the shift in writing styles.
Description
They pause so much its like watching a slide show Holy shit
Every Frame A Pause
@@BigBoySloan lol literally the name of the show
I don’t wanna sound pretentious but I always thought these mono colored canvases are meant for painters. As a viewer we assume the art is supposed to invoke some deep emotion but actually it’s meant to invoke inspiration. What would you do with this canvas what would you add onto it. Maybe I’m wrong but that’s what I always thought they were for.
Yes, I think that's a great point. And the experience of the artist, the art critic, the art lover or the "every man" are all equally valuable and "makes the art". Putting a piece on display - the 'act of viewing' is what 'makes the art' - it's not just the piece an sich, for it is just an object - it is the relationship between the viewer and the subject that generates the art.
And of course, fundamentally speaking - and not to ignored - what makes art is that it's from an artist. And an artist is someone who is considered to have both "techné" and "praxis" of their trade.
If you're talking about the Rothkos they were meant to elicit an almost meditative state for the viewer. It's supposed to transport you. If you aren't then idk I'm only 26 mins in
First thing that came to mind when I saw fountain, from the your-eye-nal's point of view, we are the fountain. Not only turning the process of making art on its head, but also reversing the role of the observer. But then again, I could very well just be fking crazy.
This thing of stopping every half a sentence is literally the death of intelligent commentary.
It simulates what being severely autistic must be like
Yeah, they should just let the whole video play without pausing and go "Ugh, that's stupid" every 3 minutes...
@@JohnSmith-wi2re Every 3 minutes? That's being quite generous.
Every Frame a Pause, baby!
Is it? I know it’s not for everyone but I think a lot of people just say shit and write entire scripts without noticing all the blatantly unsupported premises they’re using to set up arguments. I can understand how people would find it annoying but calling it the death of intelligent commentary sounds a tad dramatic
Good stuff.
Regardless of how someone feels about PT, holy fuck has she transitioned incredibly well. Good for her.
True. I really really really don't care for her content, but god damn is she looking good.
@@AssailantLF and sounding good too
still not passing
@@jeremias-serus why
@@testcase6997 can tell hes still a man
remember this is the HIGHLIGHTS. and its 3 hours, god damn
I like Destiny, but I really think they were interpreting what she was saying way too prematurely, it felt like they interupted a lot only for her to kinda elaborate later on. I feel if they just let her make her point first then their responses would be more relevant to the entire thesis
So true.
This video could have been an hour shorter if they just pre-watched the video before reacting to it so that they knew what PhilosophyTube's points were. I know the counterargument is going to be "well, she should have stated her main point at the beginning of the video for clarity" but the first half of the video is establishing basic concepts for the audience like Death of the Author just so they can actually understand and get on board with the thesis. Like, it's not really possible to fully understand Einstein's general theory of relativity without any background in algebra.
But, I'm also not pretending as if the context portion of PhilosophyTube's video isn't overindulgent; the first half of her video could also have been far more succinct.
The red paintings are the equivalent of a joke where u had to be there. Seeing them now are a bit like knowing Bruce Willis is dead and waiting for the famous line , I see dead people. It would be underwhelming because you already know the twist . To appreciate all red paintings, you must imagine how punk rock it was when no one did it . All red paintings or a circle or simple art like that are not redeeming in a visual category , only in a conceptual way that rebelled from the norms .
Let’s not pretend it’s some visual masterpiece, and see it for the zig when others would zag …. And that’s that
Lol I'm new to this streaming world but I just randomly stumbled on a part of the video where they're talking about Rothko and they're basically do the "my kids could paint this" argument. And this is the status of Every Fram A Painting. Fucking hell.
They admit a few moments after saying "my kids could paint this" that it's a tongue in cheek remark. Their main criticism of the Rothko painting is that the environment in which the painting is presented evokes a more significant response than the painting itself, assuming that art is even separable from the environment its observed in, and separable from the background of the individual(s) perceiving the art.
I feel like rhese guys came in prepared to disagree with whatever point was being made
Well, when an entire video is based around a premise you don't agree with, of course the majority (if not all) things that would be presented you would also disagree with.
But did they really even know her thesis? The first half of PhilosophyTube's video is essentially an overindulgent recap of basic concepts which are helpful for understanding her main point. So when she mentions that some people pay attention to what an artist intends for their work of art to accomplish, she's merely setting up that point to knock it down with the concept of Death of the Author, but the EFAP crew understandably assume that she's deliberately trying to defend the position she plans to refute. And the most frustrating part is that establishing the Death of the Author isn't what I think she's mainly trying to accomplish with the video.
Abigail needed to state the point of the video much much sooner. If she did, this video would maybe only be a bit over two hours long.
I'm only 16 minutes in and I'm already regretting watching this
Ok PT fan
Ya know, being hyper uncharitable can become really obnoxious even if it’s against someone you don’t like. Destiny hates PT, and even he was able to actually discuss her points in good faith, even when he disagreed. Even when I thought an argument made by PT was clumsy, the way the others would pick it apart was always far more infuriating to listen to.
That's because Mauler and Destiny are the only two individuals in this stream who are actually decent at deconstructing arguments. Rags and Fringy are definitely funnier, but most of their contributions were pointless nitpicks.
Was fun watching EFAP and destiny on the same stream, wish they would stream together more often
Lmao this comments section is actually worse than the EFAP ones. About half of those were criticising Destiny for dumb reasons, meanwhile ALL of you are criticising EFAP for dumb reasons.
“Lmao this comments section is actually worse than”
You can’t just say this comments section is worse, you need to explain what it’s worse then and why.
@@testcase6997 I don't need to justify anything. Neither do 99% of the comments here which you didn't respond to.
Also, did you read a single word I said after “worse”? I already explained why, I said there are more dumb comments here. You should be asking me why they're dumb. They're dumb because they're making arbitrary criticisms which are barely a smidge off the way their favourite content creator acts, which I would again apply to both comments sections.
@@leadfaun hahahaha
@@leadfaun damn, it sure sucks when people judge your point over half a sentence! Sorry to be so arbitrary!
@@testcase6997 ...are you alright?
33:47 The violinist guy is a bad example because they conducted that experiment in the dumbest way possible.
True
These people are the literal incarnation of "UHM ACKTUALLY 🤓"
Yes, that is literally her brand. She knows that.
the only people complaining about "actually" are just people that are salty that they are wromg all the time
Welcome to philosophy
@@JRHainsworth um actually, "people" is plural so it make more sense that the op was talking about EFAP.
why I love them
These EFAP guys have found an even more irritating circlejerk format than video essays. What an accomplishment!
“This dumbo didn’t address every single argument in half a sentence of a 30 min video lol” repeat for 3 hours.
What is efap?
EFAP= Every Frame A PAUSE
100%. Pausing every :30 and smugly overly analyzing everything someone says is million times more worthless than any video essay.
Bruh this was infuriating
2:12:35 she frases it that way because she is in the part of the video which claims value=money=meaning, not because she genuinely holds that belief 🤦
Phrases
I do enjoy listening to EFAP during a long car ride or bored at work. Glad Destiny comes on from time to time.
Can't say I really cared for the PhilosophyTube video, seems put to more into production quality than substance...or at least not enough substance for my liking on video called "Is Art Meaningless?" but enjoyed the discussion between everyone for the most part.
You can’t genuinely say you need more substance when you enjoy listening to EFAP.
@@testcase6997 bro this comment section can't even talk about substance, all the complaints are how they don't like the format, no one is addressing any arguments, don't pretend yall are intellectuals for those surface level criticisms
@@kikiRa. It’s not surface level to criticize the fact that they interrupt their adversaries halfway through a sentence to call them dumb. That’s a very fundamental problem of their critiques of her.
Why should I listen to anything anyone says if they’re only listening to have a sentence and then ranting for several minutes about how dumb that is.
Like, if I looked at your comment and said “bro this comment section can’t even talk”. I could go, what do you even mean we can’t talk? We’re literally talking now. It’s silly to suggest we can’t talk and you’re really being dishonest by claiming we can’t.
How does that feel?
Honestly it’s so funny that you think “you should listen to someone’s whole point before interrupting them 2 times a sentence to rant about how they weren’t fully including everything possible.” A surface level thing.
Yes, criticism of the format is by definition a surface level criticism you haven't talked about how they're wrong, you're just saying you don't like it and I'd say that even if your strawman of what they were doing was right.
What is funny is how people are pretending pausing a video is the same as interrupting someone in a conversation and that somehow Abigail's video isn't on the internet for anyone to watch if they're so bothered by pausing.
Destiny has a lot of “Longman bad” fans
prolly screaming into the void for nothing, but idk it got really annoying seeing chat ripping the BWAHAHAHA bit everytime the guys were paused talking/making jokes about the video. like if you aren't entertained you can mute and open another tab until they get back to doing something you like. Just seems weird to relentlessly shit on someone bc of their style of humor or the pacing of their content.
This comment section is also full of the same triggered people. “Bro this format is so dumb”, yeah don’t watch it then lol
@@roguewasbanned4746 the format is fine but their relentless nitpicking and actually misunderstanding her points just to be able to say anything is fucked
@@minoo1160 wait which points would you say are misunderstood?
This was so hard to listen to for somebody who wanted to hear them tear apart philosophy tubes video
Only 3 hours? impressive
Unironically though, 3 hours is short for EFAP.
Why here voice changed this much relative to older videos?
I think the whole art as "meta commentary on what even is art" was interesting when it first came out, but by now it's just done to death and boring, whereas those Renaissance paintings are timeless for the sheer skill it took to create them and the beauty they capture.
Yeah, we're well beyond the postmodern era.
Goddamn these dudes were infuriating, reacting to Nabokov by acting as if he was some obscurist Russian author and not incredibly mainstream
Who?
Wow they actually did that? That's hilariously self-telling.
No regular person has ever heard of this person its fine that is the case.
@DB1Dragoon The writer of Lolita? I mean I if by regular you mean the typical Anglo who is very uncultured and ignorant about anything more than five years old, then yes. But im not sure about European countries, they still maintain some standards and don't wear ignorance as a badge of honour.
@sloan9756 the writer of Lolita. I'm convinced you've heard of a Lolita complex. So you are aware of his work passively. An actively thinking person usually has curiosity to dig deeper into cultural concepts.
Anyway it's fine if you're content being a gamer who doesn't know anything about literature, you can at least admit Destiny and his buddy aren't really qualified to critique a video about art and culture when they are so poorly read.
PT: The...
Everyone in this call: UMMMM ACTUALLY
That happened exactly word for word multiple times in this vid hahaha
>EFAP
Aight, Imma head out.
ain't no way this is 3 hours...
Thank goodness for Destiny giving the only quality engagement and responses for the entire video. geezus.
These comments are amazing lmao. It’s harder to tell but destiny is on their show. This is their format, idk why people have a problem with it. They do respond to everything that’s in a video. The actual arguments. It’s like all the straw man arguments made against destiny are being parrots by dggers lmao.
hearing them fail to relate at all to all the gay jokes makes me laugh so damn hard
extrapolate what she's saying and ignore the context, then say she's expressing herself poorly 😂
On the point about bridges and art, she was:
Giving several answers to the question "Is art meaningless?"
one of which being, "~art isn't meaningless because the artist gives the art meaning through the artist's intention"
then she was giving counter-arguments to that view, one of which being that the intention is not always clear and pre-constructed as from a blueprint, which clearly gives the intention for a bridge.
She was not giving a strict distinction between functional aspects of an object and aesthetic aspects, and claiming that a bridge is not art because it is functional, nor saying that a bridge has meaning which art doesn't because the bridge has a clear conception
Please just talk to YMS
They have.
@@PatrickOMulligan not efap bruh I don't care about those guys 💀 they think joker is better than taxi driver nah b. I want destiny to talk to yms instead of them.
@@taywil4496 Not sure if you've found the video of their conversation yet. They've actually had multiple converstations.
Efap is a sad little joke and pt can probably beat mauler in a fist fight.
EFAP would be a much better podcast if it was just a solo cast with Mauler with a fraction of the total run time. His co-hosts are so annoying and repetitive. All they do is point out obvious shit in a "comedic" and mocking tone. At least Mauler is usually pretty concise and precise and fair in his criticisms.
That’s a common criticism of Rags even from EFAP fans. they didn’t do that as much back in the early days though.
The point of EFAP was to be a networking group for movie/tv show reviewers originally but it kind of just became his entire brand. I care about Mauler more than like 95% of the people that come on. His best discussions are when it's either just him and rags or him and one or two other people like the Critical Drinker podcast. Most of the people that come onto EFAP are just fishing for relevancy and it shows
Personally I think MauLer knows things have kind of gotten outside of his control and just embraced it
Yeah, Mauler is definitely the brains of the operation. But I think it would rub Rags and Fringy the wrong way if Mauler went solo at this point.
Destiny really had to hammer home how much he hates pt 😒 Like we get it.
and yet he defends her pretty well.
Did you really listen to any of this? Past 30 mins he’s defending her lmao
@@chasepalumbo2929 I did. It was just annoying that he brought it up that much at all.
At least he was critiquing the PT video, the rest of them were just talking about a bunch of bull crap like movies and asking how Abigail added f****** Reverb to her voice...REVERB.
@@williamcozart8158 Just because it's bullcrap to you doesn't make it not criticism. Is there an issue with nitpicking? Also, what's wrong with talking about sound mixing when you're a content creator?
Only ten minutes in and this is already infuriating. I don't even like most of Philosophy Tube's stuff but this is ridiculous. Constant pausing every half a sentence to the point that her train of thought is completely lost, criticism of things which do not need to be criticised, and a blatant lack of philosophical education to top it off. When Philosophy Tube points out that what a work of art is about is objective, they critique her by saying that different people can have different opinions about what a piece of art is about, which in no way contradicts what she said. This stuff is philosophy 101, so if you don't know it you have no place critiquing a philosophical discussion - even a reductive one like this video. The videos Philosophy Tube makes are reductive for people with philosophy degrees, but not for the general public who presume to know the meaning of philosophical terms based on common parlance. For the record, "objective" doesn't mean that there is one right answer. It simply means that the veracity of a statement regarding some object is ultimately grounded on the object itself. As opposed to subjective, where the ultimate grounding falls on the subject (i.e the person) making the judgement. If I say "Philosophy Tube's videos are about two brothers' quest to reclaim their lost kingdom" I would be wrong. Why? Because the standard to which my statement is held up is not my opinion (i.e it's not based on the subject, i.e it's not subjective), rather it's held to the standard of the object itself, in this case the videos. That doesn't mean that there can't be multiple answers. In fact, there is probably an infinite number of possible ways to say what the youtube channel 'Philosophy Tube' is about, but the matter is still objective, because it is determined by the object of the judgement, not the subject making the judgement. Whether or not a given food is tasty, for example, seems to rest on the subject. This is why food preference is subjective.
Well tbf what Philosophytube said was that "the 'meaning' at least is not subjective" which is what they were contesting. They had conceded earlier that what something is about is a descriptive/factual manner, but meaning is much less so and what they contested more specifically was the idea that you being able to be wrong about the meaning makes it so it is not subjective. Reason being is that other interpretations can and will be supported by the work regardless of what the final "correct" interpretation of the meaning is given that "meaning" isnt necessarily derived from the object but from the subject
@@niteip1217 The fact that it is derived from a subject doesn't mean that it doesn't fundametally rest on the object. Everything is derived from a subject in this sense, even perceptions. That doesn't make reality subjective. The grounds on which the meaning is premised is the object and not the subject, as demonstrated by Abigail's example. The fact that a work of art can produce potentially infinite interpretations is simply a feature of the kind of thing art is.
@@georgepantzikis7988 the problem is that something like "meaning" is not necessarily given to you by the work itself. How can it be said that the meaning of a work is solely derived from the object given that meaning is already a value laden concept decided upon by a subject and not inherent to the object?
@@niteip1217 I don't know what to tell you. If you don't understand the terms, read up on aesthetic philosophy. Everything you're bringing up is irrelevant. Is the ultimate grounding for what an artwork is about in the object? Yes. I don't see what meaning or different interpretations have to do with this. There's no contradiction here.
@@georgepantzikis7988 i'm not talking about what the artwork "is". Obviously we can talk about a description of some object and still be objective, but things like meaning, quality etc seem to be more than mere descriptions. To me it's the difference between saying "this rock is a rock" and "this rock is important"
God they're trying so hard to disagree with her without letting the sentence even finish and fighting a strawman
the irony of these philosophy students struggling to grasp artistic nature of the video is too deep for me bro im going to bed
17:35 "only humans are capable of convincing themselves that this is a stupid meaningful thing to do" sounds like Mauler almost accidentally defeating his own condescending argument
EFAP was stolen from Redbar radio!!
Unwatchable pausing all the time to say so little in so many words is one thing but to just be constantly autisticly wrong about the artists intentions and its relation to the meaning of the art is just sicking
There failure to understand simple concepts of art and just attacking anything they can because the refuse to accept art works have true meaning
what part do you think they didnt understand?
@@idrinkcofe the point about how some meanings are wrong. They stupidly thought that meant she was saying there is only one true meaning.
Or the fact that they really really stretched trying to convince themselves that she used subjective wrong.
It is better for listening.
@@testcase6997 well i mean if she is saying that multiple meanings can be true she didnt make that clear at all. To the point where i dont think that's what she meant because the phrase that she used was "the meaning" of the work. That the work has "AN objective meaning" implying a binary
@@niteip1217 Read what I said again. You're not comprehending the point at all. This is really not hard.
Like 80% of this is just an EFAP circlejerk.
They're open to having opposing views on their podcast, but that rarely happens.
y'all literally pause after every sentence to say exactly what she just said, but worse and more annoying.
Not even that. They pause right before she can say in a few seconds what they take MINUTES to say. If they just prewatched the video before reacting to it, they would save everyone - themselves and the audience - so much time because they would know that they don't have to pause to refute a point Abigail is making, because it turns out Abigail is only setting up a point to knock it down herself. I know Abigail doesn't make the most insightful videos in the world, partially because she wants a wide audience capture, and partially because her capabilities have limitations, but she's not so dumb that she can't even make a coherent argument without the help of these goobers.
Only EFAP could whinge for 30 minutes that someone should only spend 5 minutes on an argument, they take 4 to actually make, *while their making it*. And still come off as if their the ones being asked to much of.
Who could tolerate such entitlement.
I'm not sure it's comparable though ? Efap seem to be part reaction, part just hanging out, as opposed to a scripted video.
@@Kamfrenchie
They were just being unreasonable. I don't have any issue with them just shooting the shit for a few hours.