What is the boundary between art and pretension?
They're unrelated. Pop entertainers are typically the most pretentious because they more widely believe their work is significant.
Telling people how to react to your art
>>64311064
I was reflecting and couldn't come out to something actually significant but this guy kinda expressed it for me.
>>64311067
Yeah that's right too.
Yoko Ono is a pretty good boundary
when you get to be like Yoko, you're officially in pretension territory
>>64311124
What bothers me with Yoko is her self-indulgence and pretend lack of self-awareness
>>64311124
Can you explain this more ?
There's actually an art exposition in my city (Lyon, France) about her for like 4 months and it's all over the place, I didn't know she made anything significant but people around me are saying it's interesting without actually being able to tell me why.
What do you mean between? Are you saying art can only be unpretentious? That sounds pretty pretentious to me.
>>64311156
I'm >>64311169
Can you give examples plz ?
They're completely unrelated.
Art doesn't cease to be 'art' as a standard of your appreciation. It's like A1 identifier of a defener to claim something isn't music just because you don't like it.
>>64311191
She's like the type of avant-garde to be really secretive and distant about the meaning of her work and what you're saying is funny because her thing is having her art be this big interesting thing pre-disposed but you don't know the meaning behind it because she doesn't do a good job at presenting it and she doesn't do a good job at presenting on purpose because she's a pretentious untalented retard.
I hope this helped
>>64311124
>>64311156
You're both wrong and should research more into Yoko's music.
>>64311040
There isn't, they can't be put on a spectrum like "art-entertainment" or something. Pretension is simply when you have ideas above your station, so Yoko Ono can be pretentious, but so can a shitty garage rock band.
>>64311240
>she's a pretentious untalented retard.
>I hope this helped
Sorry anon, it didn't.
I guess you'll think I'm asking for spoonfeeding now so I'm gonna leave.
>>64311251
She's not good at anything she does.
>>64311240
literally the worst crit i ever read
>>64311254
This
>IDDS BUH-BUH-BREDENJUSS
>>64311040
>>64311064
>>64311067
>>64311124
>>64311240
The state of being 'pretentious' is a non-critique reserved for plebs. I'm not defending Yoko, but there's a shit ton of legitimate reasons you can come up with as to why she's not a good musician without just dismissing her.
Pretense = I'm too dumb to understand it
sick of u faggots still hyping over that one performance yoko did
she's really fucking goodhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRAl5Kqfy0g
>>64311321
Actually, she's addressed this in the past. Poets say she's not a poet. Singers say she's not a singer. In fact, she's just an all around artist.
If you didn't know, that picture I posted above was her performance art with John Cage.
She is a visual artist and she is good at doing very conceptual music https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_59e9V1TEkI
>Huurrr-durrr pretension isn't a legitimate criticism
Shut the fuck up, of course it is as long you have the evidence to back it up you fucking plebs
>>64311437
>evidence
That would mean that pretentiousness is measured objectively but it really isn't.
>>64311380
True
>>64311409
Yup. If it was of a fathomable depth that you could understand and dissect it, then you wouldn't have to a memey buzzword just to dismiss it.
>>64311124
when you are like yoko, you are way beyond this boundary
>>64311431
>In fact, she's just an all around artist.
:cringe.jpg:
>>64311437
There isn't evidence for literally any artist ever being pretentious. Based retard.
>>64311380
That may be how people use it but it's not the correct way of using it.. I would only ever use the word pretentious if something is too easy to understand yet it's presented as a work of genius.
>>64311472
oh m-my god he cringed at m-me
please make it s-stop I'm so embarassed
:^)
has anybody seen that video of a live performance art (i think i saw it on a random cringe femenist video on YT) of a girl doing gross things with her period?
>>64311552
Yeah
Again, it doesn't cease to be 'art' as a standard of your appreciation. You sound like a retard calling it pretentious when it's literally just bad art.
>>64311364
does anyone have this image in a bigger rez?
>>64311552
this one? http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/interior-semiotics
>>64311472
her cut piece is artistically more interesting than anything The Beatles have ever done.
>>64311669
that says nothing
pretentious is someone on a chinese cartoon bbs thinking they know more about art than someone who actually makes it
>>64311796
Well I guess her forcing Lennon and Starkey to play what PiL would do years later in 1970 isn't impressive either. Your head is so far up your ass you probably won't hear it though.
https://youtu.be/rfMHAGJl1W8
hating on yoko is the best proof of millenial infestation, not to mention reddit
no wonder stand up comedians make a killing when they're average joes marketing to average joes
>>64312190
/thread
If you were to look at her values and the content of her artwork, Yoko is very much NOT pretentious. In fact, she's pretty sweet. Look up her "Wish Tree" as an example, a lot of her art asks of the viewer/participant to be kind to yourself and shit.
Also you guys can't separate her like clearly avant-garde shit that's that on PURPOSE with her pop music which is pretty solid shit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzV7FiuDYKo
>>64311064
best post
>>64311040
>pre·ten·tious
>prəˈten(t)SHəs/
>adjective: pretentious
>attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.
Hence you would need to objectively know what the correct amount of importance, talent, culture is possessed by said artist, whihc is impossible unless you are the actual artist.
To do otherwise would be... pretentious.
Comedy and self-awarness.
>>64312190
this.
Yoko is criminally panned by Beatles worshippers and millennials because theres a video on youtube of her incoherently screaming or they heard 1 out of the 1000's of comedians rant about her without ever being exposed to any of her work or collaborations. What's even worse is people worship the man who beat hear and controlled her. John Lennon literally made Yoko go to every Beatles rehearsal. People get it mixed up when they imply Yoko injected herself into Lennon's life and ruined the Beatles. John's egomania and overall faggotry graved the Beatles long before Yoko's arrival.
>>64311124
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9kgu71d81U
Video very much related
>>64311933
pil is shit tho
it still says fuck all
>>64313587
Your post is shit though
it still says fuck all
>>64311040
There is no boundary, even the most pretentious art is still art.
This is dumb.
I think what you meant to say was, the boundary between quality experimentation and pretension.
In which case, I think
>>64311067
makes a good case
>>64313553
>HUUUUUUR BILL BURR IS SO FUNNY GUYS
>He's just like me
>No one makes music like the beatles any more amirite?!
>>64313548
>What's even worse is people worship the man who beat hear and controlled her.
[citation needed]
>John Lennon literally made Yoko go to every Beatles rehearsal
Incorrect. There is literally footage of Yoko offering input to The Beatles of arranging songs, with Paul being extremely irritated that an outsider would even do that. If you are forced into being there, you wouldn't be so assertive as to offer suggestions to the fucking Beatles.
>>64313652
you seem in dire need of an authority figure.
>>64311380
Sometimes, but not always. And pretense isn't always bad, either.
>>64311431
this is a good album tbf
>>64313673
Nice non argument.
>>64313652
>bring gf to band practice
>m8s think she's a cunt
everytime
>>64313652
>i can't google guise
>one instance of Yoko providing input negates the fact that John Lennon made Yoko attend Beatles rehearsals
>putting the Beatles on a pedestal
k, kid.
>>64313752
>I don't know how an argument works guys
>Prove otherwise
>not knowing my reference
You are not intelligent.
>>64313652
>he like the beatles
honestly worse than liking Yoko Ono
>>64313844
Why? What's wrong with them?
>>64313777
>asks for source
>doesn't provide one to support his own argument
>calls out people for not knowing how to argue
>likes the Beatles
Could you be a bigger faggot?
>>64313881
You made the initial claim, so the burden of proof is on you.
>>64311040
theres no boundary they can be one in the saem
>>64313880
They're not the Kinks nor the Beach Boys.
John Lennon was a chameleon who stole peoples ideas and turned them into crappy songs. Mcartney was a piss baby.
I will say however the Beatles can be celebrated for achievements in recording processes and technology. But thats not really all due to them.
>>64313907
https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/you-dont-have-to-imagine-john-lennon-beat-women-and-childrenits-just-a-fact
there you go.
>>64313933
>They're not the Kinks nor the Beach Boys.
That's OK. if all artists sounded the same, music would be pretty boring, no?
>John Lennon was a chameleon who stole peoples ideas and turned them into crappy songs
Like... The Kinks and The beach boys?
>But thats not really all due to them
In as much as the sound of Pet Sounds is not really due to Brian Wilson.
>>64313994
>vice.com
Looking for a real source please.
>>64311364
>The state of being 'pretentious' is a non-critique reserved for plebs
this. I think people will find the more art/music/literature/fashion/cinema they consume, the less and less they label things quickly as "pretentious".
It's dismissive and does nothing to help you (because it limits your consumption of art) or the artist (because it's invalid criticism).
>>64311067
I would put that statement side-by-side with also telling other people how to react or feel about artists. The concept of "You just don't UNDERSTAND 'X'." is pretentious while something that evokes a reaction naturally is art.
>>64313997
>In as much as the sound of Pet Sounds is not really due to Brian Wilson
L M A O
M
A
O
>>64313994
>vice.com
no thanks
>>64314055
>The concept of "You just don't UNDERSTAND 'X'." is pretentious
If it's a reaction to dismissive thinking of "LISTEN TO HER SCREAM WAT A DUM BITCH LOL" then it's warranted, because that lacks any critical analysis needed for evaluating art successfully
>>64314150
Yeah, I didn't think about that. I guess another boundary is when criticism becomes pretentious?
Hunter Hunt-Hendrix is pretentious, but he still makes (in my opinion) great and interesting music.
You can go for exact definitions if you want but you can just look at the artist and see if they're being fucking dicks by seeing if they are doing things that don't work with the music they're making or just making music only the artist and their mum will appreciate.
Like maudlin of the Well is a classic example, when they were trying to meld horns, opera singing and death metal into their music they were like one of the pretentious bands around. Once they were able to formulate all those ideas into actual consistent theme though (with Part the Second) they made something that felt grandiose and not completely fucking embarrassing.
I feel like pretentious could probably be measured mathematically when a band does tries to do way too many things under the same umbrella.
pretentiousness is a weak criticism in almost any case, and the person claiming it is usually just insecure.
>>64311431
and? Doesn't mean she's not shit
>>64311040
There isn't one. The whole idea of making useless stuff that other people critique when you could learn a trade or be a farmer or some shit is the definition of pretense
>>64314390
If your definition of art is "useless stuff that other people critique" then why the fuck are you on this board?
People can say a pretentious thing, and no one argues that. Art is another way of expressing yourself, or of saying something, so art can certainly be pretentious.
>>64314016
>provides one source out of the hundreds that popped up on google
>article contains links from interviews supporting point
>doesn't bother to click
>continues to ignore obvious Lennon's obvious megalomania and spousal abuse
>is too pleb to understand Yoko's artistry
>>64311040
there's no such thing
>>64314510
>>article contains links from interviews supporting point
That he beat Yoko? Not at all.
Also the article has no citations itself. Might as well have posted a buzzfeed link
>continues to ignore obvious Lennon's obvious megalomania and spousal abuse
None was posted (that have valid factual merit).
>is too pleb to understand Yoko's artistry
Quote me where I discussed her artistry.
>>64313997
>in as much as the sound of Pet Sounds in not really Brian Wilson
I don't have a dog in this fight but this might be one of the most ignorant statements I've ever read on /MU/.
I'm going to assume you don't actually stand by that statement and are just talking out of your ass for arguments sake.
>>64314606
How so?
>>64314633
>being this dense
>>64314715
Ooops you meant to quote this guy >>64314606
Sorry about that!
>>64311040
There is no boundary. It doesn't stop being art if it's pretentious, it just stops being good.
>>64311401
She has a nice voice and it's a cute song but the backing music is kinda boring.
>>64314581
Information about how much a douche Lennon was is widely available on the internet. Much of the info comes from his own admissions. Like you have to be intentionally avoiding this info to continue your martyrdom for Lennon and the Beatles. Get your head out of your ass.
>>64311040
There is no boundary. Pretentious art is still art. It's not good art, but it's art.
most people who cry "pretensious" usually are too dumb to think conceptually and it goes over their heads because it doesnt provide them immediate pleasure or requires one to think critically about the world and themselves.
>>64315360
>Information about how much a douche Lennon was is widely available on the internet.
I googled "Lennon beta Yoko" (whihc is the claim made earlier) and have had no results. Care to elaborate?
>martyrdom for Lennon and the Beatles.
Quote me where I stated my personal opinion on The Beatles.
>>64315538
>"Lennon beta Yoko" (whihc is the claim made earlier) and have had no results. Care to elaborate?
probably because you mispelled beat
>>64315581
OK I tried again with typos fixed and no results.
Care to elaborate?
>>64315619
youre right all that comes up is clickbait like vice or reddit or pfucking playboy. no real journalism
We dont judge art by its creator intentions. We only judge art for how we react to it.
Johnny Ramone was the greatest punk guitar player ever lived, but people close to him will tell you he was a awful to Joey, and only carried on with The Ramones for the money and his own ego.
>>64315855
>no real journalism
>all of the articles contain links to more in depth sources
But i suppose actually clicking on them would challenge what you believe and your'e too stupid to let that happen.
i don't think so
There is none
Music is inherently pretentious. It's attempting to be something more than what it is.
>>64316394
None of those sources say he beat Yoko.
Calling something pretentious says more about the person making the accusation than the actual individual in question.
>>64311040
They aren't like a continuum or something. They're completely separate things. You personally ascribe value to a piece of art and if someone thinks you're ascribing more value than a piece of art deserves to appear more cultured or something, then they think you are pretentious.
A piece of art by itself can't be pretentious. Unless the lyrics of the song are about how it's the best song in the world or something...
>>64314415
Because I like all this useless stuff, a lot. Doesn't make it not pretentious
I feel like pretentiousness isn't related to the creation/performance of art, but of the reaction to it.
