Originally Posted by nihilist moron

It looks like a "real topic" is whether or not self-hating boomers will commit mass suicide to make the world a better place.
My guess is "no."

Is that your attempt to discuss a real issue?

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

I treasure AC/DC and their modern incarnation, Airbourne.

I rest my case! (It's hard hauling around all my treasure anyway).

I don't like <<you certainly know who>>

Treasure is waiting there for you!

A lot of times heavy metal exposes inconvenient truths. So that makes it the Al Gore of the music world.

No, truth is beauty.

Yup, and I hope you've noticed I've put the shrine thread on ignore.

I didn't know you could put a thread on ignore.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

At least I can appreciate artists who are different and respect those differences. Typical idealist boomer with extreme boomer qualities.

To paraphrase one of your fellow civics: extremism in defense of beauty is no vice!

You don't get it.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Is that your attempt to discuss a real issue?

Yes!
I can also talk about punk music, if you like. Here's my suggestion for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktXbUXqP6QE

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Likewise the word "guys" is gender neutral in American vernacular for those born after 1960. For example:

"How are you guys doing?" Spoken to a group composed of males and females.

Hmm. What happens if someone born in 1956 says to a mixed-gender group of people -- hey, you guys, anyone want to go out"? Am I being incorrect, although if someone 5 years younger says it, it's okay?

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

To paraphrase one of your fellow civics: extremism in defense of beauty is no vice!

You don't get it.

and you do not get it either. Some "artist" you are if you cannot appreciate the differences without criticizing they should be "beautiful." That is not their message. You do not get it. How can you be an artist without being aware of image/sound and how it can have a different impact. You focus on what art you want to create and let others create what they want to. It is not your business to tell other artists what they should create no matter how subtle that criticism is. You remind me of that art teacher i had who said "now picasso was great but if he had shifted the scene over here to the left more it would have been perfect." Us students could not believe he had said that. We do not know the mind of picasso, of what his message was and why he chose to set the picture a certain way and why he decided to paint in a certain style either. We can discuss the style and why it looks the way it looks naturally. But it is not our place to give "advice" that people should make the work more "beautiful." To take a line from Kinser i will say that is snobbery. Btw that is not what i was talking about when i said you are an extreme boomer. You have characteristics that show you are (to take a line from someone who said i am a caricature of a millennial) you are a caricature of a boomer. A boomer who shows extreme boomer traits. If you do not get what i am saying by now i give up. YOU CANNOT TELL FELLOW ARTISTS HOW TO PORTRAY THEIR WORK TO THE WORLD. In some cases it may diminish the message and the feeling of that message. You are a peculiar artist if you do not understand that. You create what you want to and let the rest of us create it the way we want to. Criticize us on our work, but it is not your place to say your sound would be better if only they made it more "beautiful." It is you who does not get that.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

Hmm. What happens if someone born in 1956 says to a mixed-gender group of people -- hey, you guys, anyone want to go out"? Am I being incorrect, although if someone 5 years younger says it, it's okay?

You should be fine. I'm happy at least one boomer is copying Xers. That said, it would figure it would be a disco waver.

Let's see if I "get" what tara is saying about the arts:

All art is the same. There's no difference between beautiful and ugly, or good and bad art, ever.

No-one should ever speak any opinion about someone's art. That is rude.

Your life circumstances dictate what you shall create.

No, I don't agree. Sorry!

Tara,

Here's the thing. Eric-the-Ignoramus is not an artist. Unless we're talking about being a con-artist (I mean he is an astrologer and all). He is not an artist by archetype, he is not an artist by hobby and certainly not by profession. So what is Eric? He is an ideologue. And since he is a boomer ideologue all who disagree with him are evil.

Seriously, if Eric wanted to say the sky was pink, when everyone else says it is blue he'd argue the point endlessly and still manage to be wrong regardless the evidence presented. If he doesn't like our reality he substitutes it with his own.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Let's see if I "get" what tara is saying about the arts:

All art is the same. There's no difference between beautiful and ugly, or good and bad art, ever.

No-one should ever speak any opinion about someone's art. That is rude.

Your life circumstances dictate what you shall create.

No, I don't agree. Sorry!

I do not know where you got that idea. Art is personal and art is what the audience interprets it as. It is NOT the same. I am saying it is the opposite in fact. I have said it is PERSONAL. I have SAID again and again we can say something on it but you do not get to say artists should change their style...DO. YOU. GET. IT. NOW? I understand why kinser calls you ignoramus.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Tara,

Here's the thing. Eric-the-Ignoramus is not an artist. Unless we're talking about being a con-artist (I mean he is an astrologer and all). He is not an artist by archetype, he is not an artist by hobby and certainly not by profession. So what is Eric? He is an ideologue. And since he is a boomer ideologue all who disagree with him are evil.

Seriously, if Eric wanted to say the sky was pink, when everyone else says it is blue he'd argue the point endlessly and still manage to be wrong regardless the evidence presented. If he doesn't like our reality he substitutes it with his own.

Oh i totally agree with you, Kinser. It is like talking to a brick wall with the man. It is like he does not even read english. Yes, it is pointless so i will waste no more time on the guy.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

Oh i totally agree with you, Kinser. It is like talking to a brick wall with the man. It is like he does not even read english. Yes, it is pointless so i will waste no more time on the guy.

Ha ha, defect over to Kinser! Good luck with that one!

It's you who didn't read english, tara. try again.

It's something I notice that happens frequently here, especially among non-boomers. Non-comprehension; inability to respond to what someone actually writes. Of course, Kinser is exhibit A.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

Oh i totally agree with you, Kinser. It is like talking to a brick wall with the man. It is like he does not even read english. Yes, it is pointless so i will waste no more time on the guy.

Oddly I think I told you talking to him was like talking to brick wall when you came here. I only engage with him when he presents one of his usual crackpot theories I can rip apart. And only then if it interests me. He is at best entertainment, at worst an annoyance. Actual debate with him is impossible.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Ha ha, defect over to Kinser! Good luck with that one!

I guess I'm Cuba now.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Oddly I think I told you talking to him was like talking to brick wall when you came here. I only engage with him when he presents one of his usual crackpot theories I can rip apart. And only then if it interests me. He is at best entertainment, at worst an annoyance. Actual debate with him is impossible.

Yes you did. I had to learn the hard way. Did not realize people like this actually existed. The title you have given him most certainly in this case fits him nicely. He is most certainly no artist if he cannot understand the basics of art.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Ha ha, defect over to Kinser!

It does seem to be love/hate with her doesn't it.
Did you watch the video that I posted? Something to inspire you as you write posts about kicking some ISIS bootie.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

Yes you did. I had to learn the hard way. Did not realize people like this actually existed. The title you have given him most certainly in this case fits him nicely. He is most certainly no artist if he cannot understand the basics of art.

It is certainly hard to argue with someone, if you argue with something that the other person did not say. Yes, that is hard tara.

Originally Posted by nihilist moron

It does seem to be love/hate with her doesn't it.
Did you watch the video that I posted? Something to inspire you as you write posts about kicking some ISIS bootie.

Funny. OK I'll remember that. Maybe.

I remember that George Bush wanted a war because someone kicked an officer in the ass, back in 1989. But I'm not in a position to make that happen.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Some would argue that Punk itself is as American as apple pie and Jesus. (Meaning an import that we made our own.)

Yes, that is true. Punk is primitive and natural, and yet also very social and political. It had a universal, trans-national appeal--not because specific works appealed to people across the globe (though that did of course happen), but rather because it was a media and mode that anyone could use to express their own personal/social/political situation. DIY (do it yourself)! It was very democratic.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Mockingbird admitted that punk was ugly music (although he enjoys it), but said they created it out of frustration with the deindustrialization of England.

I am not a "he." And it was Ragnarok that mentioned the de-industrialization of England. (Not that he was wrong about that.) Are you conflating the two of us?

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

So I said it could be expressed through beauty as well as the ugly.

I find beauty in the "ugliness" of punk. Punk is raw, authentic expression. A lot of people found expressionist art to be ugly, too. But to me, punk, in all its primitive discordance and vulgarity is more beautiful than any of the syrupy pop music that you favor.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Funny. OK I'll remember that. Maybe.

I remember that George Bush wanted a war because someone kicked an officer in the ass, back in 1989. But I'm not in a position to make that happen.

Oh come on. You and pbrower could collaborate on an inspiring, spiritual folk song about dropping bombs on the Infernal State.

Originally Posted by nihilist moron

It looks like a "real topic" is whether or not self-hating boomers will commit mass suicide to make the world a better place.
My guess is "no."

You aren't trying to give any suggestions, are you?

So far as I can tell, the worst Boomers (the narcissists in charge) are in general very happy with their lives. I would be happy to retire and blacklist them, thank you.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

You aren't trying to give any suggestions, are you?

So far as I can tell, the worst Boomers (the narcissists in charge) are in general very happy with their lives. I would be happy to retire and blacklist them, thank you.

No, I don't think she was giving suggestions lol. I think because the topic was raised she just mentioned it because it was a few boomers who mentioned it but wont do anything about it. That is what i take from her message anyway. Of course they won't but they thought the world would be better without them. Something I was shocked to read from a few boomers themselves. I was none too happy.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Here's the thing. Eric is not an artist. Unless we're talking about being a con-artist (I mean he is an astrologer and all). He is not an artist by archetype, he is not an artist by hobby and certainly not by profession. So what is Eric? He is an ideologue. And since he is a boomer ideologue all who disagree with him are evil.

One needs not be an artist to recognize Kitsch for what it is. I'm reasonably liberal on what I consider valid (primitive art can be powerful and modern art can be expressive). Incompetence of execution degrades any artistic effort. But so does blatant distortion for pointless effect (or is affect more apt?)
Thus the piano recordings of Liberace are considered rubbish. The late Floyd Cramer, with his excess grace notes on pop standards, tires me quickly. Lawrence Welk, who can make just about any two pieces of music sound alike with his gimmicky arrangements, is awful.

Seriously, if Eric wanted to say the sky was pink, when everyone else says it is blue he'd argue the point endlessly and still manage to be wrong regardless the evidence presented. If he doesn't like our reality he substitutes it with his own.

Have you ever heard the expression "Red sky at night, sailor's delight; red sky by morning, sailors take warning"? Small concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (as in the typical sky around Greater Los Angeles) can add a reddish cast to a sky. I have seen some very red skies, and not the consequence of pollution.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

Lawrence Welk, who can make just about any two pieces of music sound alike with his gimmicky arrangements, is awful.

*hears hordes of angry Boomers go after Brower with torches and pitchforks*