I am an atheist, but... (Page 5)

MercuryDragon
8 years ago Report
0
Nicotina
8 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: Explicit: "You may need a few hobbies"

THIS is one of my hobbies - observe me playing with it as I see fit, just as I do in my gardens and kennel. I switch to this one when my back is sore and I need a rest.

Glad to hear you're paying attention to the notifications - that way, you haven't missed anything. The lazy ones will miss conveyance of my secret knowledge.

[This post was deliberately edited to enter a period at the end of a sentence.....and this particular heads up}
(Edited by Zanjan)
8 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: Good points re: video, Nicotina. I wonder if he does his own eye makeup and hair at the Xmas party too.

So many things are now designated to folk culture. I don't mind, as long as there's some folk dancing. Have you done your pole dance yet? Maypole - Blessed Beltane.

8 years ago Report
0
Aura
Aura: Actually, I can sing quite a few religious songs AND I can sing quite a few songs of Danzig and Slayer from memory (not well mind you, I can never quite reach Glenn Danzig low notes nor Tom Araya's high pitched scream) But I put as much importance to the words "I once was lost but now I'm found, Was blind but now I see" as to "I'm not about to see your light, but if you want to find hell with me I can show you what it's like"

They are not literal to me, because I don't believe in god and I don't believe in the devil. But I've felt both sentiments in my life. The music to me isn't about the believes I hold, it's about the emotion translated into words with an elegance I could never achieve. So I borrow them. To express myself.


8 years ago Report
1
Zanjan
Zanjan: So, if you're bowing words to express yourself, its not actually you that's doing the expressing, is it?

I mean, music has parts. It could be nothing more than a drum beat. An instrumental conveys the melody, which like the drum beat, expresses the players feelings. Music via voice only is acapella or a chant - that's the heart's expression of words, the first song and the most personal conveyance.

Whereas, an instrumental with lyrics is a song meant to share a message but is not your personal expression - that belongs to the author.

8 years ago Report
0
Geoff
Geoff: You really don't understand art do you?

Although the original meaning of any work of art, be it music (and instrumental music conveys a hell of a lot of meaning for those that actually pay attention to it), or a poem, or a painting, or a sculpture - while the creators meaning defines it's construction, it is the viewer or listener who ultimately creates their own meaning from what they experience of it.

That's the purpose of art.
8 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: Yes, I understand art - I'm an artist myself. I think you're not understanding MY art. What I'm saying is that if you sing a song with lyrics, you're supporting the message of the lyrics.

As much as I enjoy a lovely melody, I might listen to it but wont sing it if I don't approve of the lyrics - that would make me a hypocrite.

I don't think you can compare sculpture or a painting or photograph with song. I disagree one should get their own meaning of it. As an artist, I aim to convey MY meaning and hope you'll enjoy it as *I* see it. Why? Because it may not be something you were able to see for yourself. THAT's the purpose of art.
(Edited by Zanjan)
8 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: Now, if you want to see art as nothing but entertainment, that's your choice but never confuse that with its purpose.
8 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: For some reason, this brings to mind two wonderful stand up comics, who've spoken publicly on their art.

Both said they wanted to bring happiness to people who might not otherwise be happy people. They admitted they weren't happy people themselves and this was comic relief. . So, what's the understory here in their art - is it solely to make you laugh? Absolutely not. If you were paying attention, you'd see how amazingly astute they were on timing, observance of people, their ability to empathize while judging them correctly.

They wanted to share their amazing insight in a way that people could understand how to laugh at their own follies and understand others follies better. As a side effect, they absorbed so much of the world, that knowledge became a burden too heavy to carry on their own.
(Edited by Zanjan)
8 years ago Report
0
Geoff
Geoff: It's nice that you're so perfect that nobody else's thoughts when they see your art matters.

I used to sing Hey Diddle Diddle to my kids when they were little. Doesn't mean that I believe that cows can actually jump over the moon.
8 years ago Report
0
AliveSomewhereElse
AliveSomewhereElse: I'd just like to say that everyone's posts about the music were beautiful and I enjoyed them immensely. <3
8 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: Geoff, with all due respect, real artists are more critical of their work than anyone on earth. Not until the artist is completely satisfied he's produced the highest quality will he publish. Once he's decided to share, no one can touch it.

Many art critics and paparazzi have often raised the ire of the finest artists in history, to the point communication between them has been cut off. Why? Because they pretended to know what the artist was thinking and didn't even come close. In essence, they utterly dismissed the artist's expression.

Of course, if all an artist wants is money and attention, he only needs to do something so outrageous, it has no meaning - just shock value.

Did you know that Earnest Hemingway, already famous when he wrote "For whom the Bells Tolls" re-wrote the last page of his book 8 times before he took it to the publisher? He was an unrelenting editor, so good he didn't need anyone else's opinion. Why did he write it then? Because he could and you couldn't!
(Edited by Zanjan)
8 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: So how many people, when studying the Statue of David, ponder "What the hell was he thinking?" No, they know he was trying to draw one's eyes to the details, to the polished beauty and perfect creation of the human body. This piece was made with the greatest love and care.

If public opinion mattered, some would say the artist was expressing his homosexual tendencies............please... he'd roll over in his grave!

Society dictates that it's improper to stare at anyone; with David, you could stare with a clear conscience, for as long as you wished and no one would beat you up for it. Yep, it was all about religion. Michelangelo was commissioned by the church to sculpt this personage who, in real life, danced naked in the streets.
(Edited by Zanjan)
8 years ago Report
0
Nicotina
Nicotina: "Real Artists", that in itself shows arrogance.
You might not like the art, you might not even be able to appreciate the art but you can respect the artist for daring to express themselves in a public manner.

As for appreciating art, there are many thoughts that art elicits hence it being called art.
8 years ago Report
1
Zanjan
Zanjan: You can call a tail a leg but on a dog, its still a tail. Real Artist = Mastery in a field, be it professional or not.

I went to an exhibit once where the so called artist spilled a pail of blood onto the floor. Then she spilled a pail of bull seamen on top of that. Then she got down on her hands and knees and smeared it all into a bigger mess. If you want to call that art, its your choice but it sure as hell ain't mastery! What you have is originality, specifically, shock value.
(Edited by Zanjan)
8 years ago Report
0
Nicotina
Nicotina: She had an exhibit and you didn't. Might be for shock value, so what?
Did you bother to ask the artist what she was attempting to convey?
8 years ago Report
1
Zanjan
Zanjan: I had my own exhibits in another gallery and they didn't shock anyone - that wasn't my purpose. She conveyed quite clearly her intent. I will say, my exhibits were in an artists competition. Yes, they had to be scored by respected Masters in the field, not the public..
(Edited by Zanjan)
8 years ago Report
0
Nicotina
Nicotina: Exactly, it's almost always about your ego Zanjan.
Why not just be grateful that you can have such experiences and allow others to draw their own conclusions.
8 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: Well, I suppose if you always look at ego, you must really know ego inside and out. Maybe it's time you looked at something you don't know anything about? Like, Mastery over ego..then just enjoy the experience. Your privilege is to choose not to enjoy it - doesn't bother me one bit.
(Edited by Zanjan)
8 years ago Report
0
Nicotina
Nicotina: Could you edit that so it makes sense, please?
8 years ago Report
1
Zanjan
Zanjan: Why? You've already decided what it means.
8 years ago Report
0
Nicotina
Nicotina: I asked you to please edit it because I do not understand what point you are trying to make.
8 years ago Report
1
Zanjan
Zanjan: No. Deal with it. I've written it precisely that way because I'm expressing something of myself I wish to keep in pristeen condition.
(Edited by Zanjan)
8 years ago Report
0
Nicotina
8 years ago Report
0