Mark, if the Walkin' Dude is part of Las Vegas' culture scene, I encourage you and your family to stay as far away from him as you can!

Macker,

Well, most locals stay away from downtown and the strip...that is for the suckers...err, the welcome guests to our town who de-facto pay about half our State taxes...

:o)

...who de-facto pay about half our State taxes...

Akin to we Maryland "suckers" who assist Deleware and WV in their revenue collections due to a corrupt MD legislature who have successfully obstructed Gov Ehrlich's bid to bring slots to MD.

Soon, we'll also be pumping money into Pennsylvania's state coffers. When I get back from England, I'm vacating the People's Republic of Maryland, unless they get their sh** together...

RE: "...Each type of art [is] just a variation on the theme of 'I have no talent, and I hate you' ... the arts culture in the United States is quite dead ... they can't sink any lower, and they haven't the capability of rising higher ... just sad and pathetic."

Well said! That pretty much sums it up in a nutshell!

It used to be that art meant talent or hard work, and usually... both. Art was something that most people actually could recognize as "art" without needing to be told that is "supposed" to be art. Yes, there are still talented "artists" and "real" art around, but it's hard to find!

Spell "art" backward and you have the first three letters of what most of it is today -- TRASH! Much of today's "art" was made from items pulled from the trash and... it should have remained in the trash! At least the worms and bacteria could have benefited from consuming it. It definitely isn't fit for human consumption!

I no longer support any tax dollars being given to "arts", because they can go to support just about any garbage that someone claims is art, even elephant manure spread on religious paintings and sculptures! It seems the more obscene, hateful, anti-American, anti-Christian, and unpatriotic a "piece" is, the more today's "critics" rave about how good it is!

Raving lunatics is more like it!!!

It fits right in with what the liberal culture and lifestyle has done to America.

Hard work and perseverance have been replaced by "instant gratification."

Quotas have replace standards and excellence.

And so on, and so on, and so on...

AAR

Mark - let me ask you a question. If you had your way, what would you like to do with the liberals in this country? I'm talking about the modern artists, the gangsta rappers, the peaceniks, the liberal gays and lesbians, the environmentalists, the multiculturalists and all of the so called rich elite and liberal intelligencia that patronizes the freaky lefty art. Would you like to convert them all into "normal" Americans? Would you like them all to move to another country? Would you like them to be brought to heel, perhaps ashamedly bowing and averting their eyes when a normal conservative person is nearby? I'm trying to understand what your ideal is, and further, where it is you are going with these culture rants.

Mark's comments about his impressions seemed to be precisely that. He made his observations, and stated how he felt.

According to extramedium, somehow this involves some hidden agenda or sinister plan being baked up in his mind to do away with all that he saw as disgusting and perverse. So, I went back and reread the post. Hmmm.... I didn't see even a hint of what extramedium seems to find so readily apparent in Mark's comments.

Sooo.... I reread the post again. Still, no "call for roundups," no call for them to "move to another country." In fact, Mark implicitly acknowledges that this group of ragtag fringe freaks is going to be here, for at least another generation, because he states,

"...It will take a new generation of patrons to stimulate a real culture - a real avant garde which will challenge perceptions, and try to impart a bit of wisdom and beauty in to life. .."

That statement clearly shows no intent or urging on Mark's part to "round anyone up," or "conver them all into 'normal' Americans." He simply made his observations, expressed his take on the scene, and said it was "sad and pathetic." Nowhere did he single out "modern artists, the gansta rappers, the peaceniks, the liberal gays and lesbians, the environmentalists, the multiculturalists and all of the so-called rich elite and liberal intelligencia that patronizes the freaky left art." He simply said what he was was dark, despressing and depraved.

Is he not entitled to his observations and opinions?

Unlike Americans on the freaky left, he simply states his opinions and draws his conclusions. They are the ones who consistently state their opinions, draw their conclusions, and then INSIST THAT EVERYBODY ELSE ADHERE TO THEM. That's the way it's been for my whole life, and I expect that they'll continue to have this upside-down vision of representative democracy.

Seems like they are always claiming to be the "open to all ideas" crowd, the "big tent" party, and the "free speech" group. All that works out just fine - as long as your ideas adhere to their preset agenda, you sit in the "tent" where they tell you to, and your speech conforms to their thought processes...

Nowhere in his post has Mark insisted or urged anyone to take action, or for that matter, to agree with him on his observations.

Methinks extramedium doth protest too much!!!

On the other hand, today is Sunday. Perhaps the trolls have come out to play...

Mark figures that they're all a bunch of traitors and defeatists. I'm not sure if he has a plan for them or not -- he left that out of his last treason rant. Perhaps they can be hanged from telephone polls with signs that describe their crimes: "I made defeatist utterances," or "I insulted the president," or "my art is degenerate, unpatriotic and sucks too."

dbogdan - you must be clairvoyant, since you are simultaneously able to know what's in my mind AND Mark's mind.

Or perhaps you just misunderstood my post. My point was not to suggest that Mark has a hidden plan to round up all of the freaks, homosexuals and traitors and put them in camps somewhere. That's a practical consideration. I rather wish to understand what his IDEAL would be.

In an IDEAL world, does he wish liberals didn't exist? Does he wish that liberals existed, but were powerless? Would he take satisfaction in converting all of the liberals into conservatives? Knowing this would help me establish a philisophical foundation for better understanding the rest of his posts. It would also help me figure out for myself how we're all going to live together in this country, because I for one am tired of the divisive idealogical battle.

Instead of talking for Mark, why don't you tell me what you think?

All right Macker!!! A Stephen King reference!
It is refreshing to see such a thing on this site, since it is usually such a haven for only politics.

However, since Stephen King is probably a liberal, Mark probably cannot stand him (get it - Stand - ha ha)

Anyway, such a shame that there is always some kind of liberal hatred going on here, both from Mark and others. But at least it's good news to see some literary references.

Unfortunately for all of us in America, if we keep treating each other like dirt - Conservative Vs. Liberal, etc... we are all going to feel the Dark Tower's collapse, and there will be no Gunslingers left to defend us from ourselves.

Mark:
You're pretty young, aren't you?
This "avaunt guard" has been around since the 50s, at which time they called themselves Beatniks. The styles have changed somewhat, but the attitude is the same. All is dust, crap is art, and image is all.
We survived the Beat. We will survive the Goth - or whatever they think they are this week.
In the meantime, if you want to see real cutting edge art, try an expensive gallery. They can't afford to waste their time on minor talent OR on fading trends. You'll get your proper education on modern culture there.

Thaks, dbogdan, for pointing out the Left's dependence on mind reading. They also have to have a healthy dose of misstatement of the other person's position or argument.

I am not going to tell you what Mark THOUGHT about the situation. But I can tell you what I thought when I read it. And that was a variation on The Emperor Has No Clothes. It's sad to see no-talent whiners posing as artists and intellectuals, supported only by their equally no-talent peers, strutting around acting as if they really have something to say. Kinda funny, kinda sad. But then I was a hippie once, and got a kick out of offending The Establishment with my 24-inch-wide bellbottom hems, my foul mouth, and my acid rock "old man's" renditions of Country Joe and Fish anti-Viet Man songs. (He is now a CPA, and I am a hard-core conservative. So some of the posturing strutters may snap out of it when they grow up a little.)

As STH pointed out, the poseurs have been around for a long long time. It's just that they used to be ridiculed, and now they are feted.

For a good look at the posturing and self-promotion of these empty shells, rent a movie called Zoolander. The 'male models' in this movie are so vapid, so self-involved, so self-promoting, and so self-impressed, it's a great analogy for the "artistes" Mark described.

All I heard him say is that they were silly. No camps, no roundups, no bowing and scraping, no evil fascist agenda, just a grin and a giggle for some posturing punkinheads.

extramedium,

I WAS speaking for myself!

As for coming to Mark's defense, I'm not going to apologize for it. I've seen him attacked by so many people just for having an opinion, that I jumped the gun in this instance.

Perhaps I misread your post, so I reread it. It wasn't until the very last sentence that the question was asked of what might be Mark's "ideal" . Everything up to that point offered a series of options that you - not Mark - thought might be feasible. To that extent, it appears that it was you, not me, who must be the clairvoyant in regards to Mark's thought processes.

You offered three options: convert, move, or "brought to heel"

I don't feel that any of them are necessary in any way. I don't know how Mark would respond to them. Freaks, or whatever you want to call them, are free to be what they are in this country. It's called freedom of association. I have no problem with the so-called "subculture." In fact, I welcome its presence, because it allows a fuller expression of the spectrum of the human condition. It is only through comparing one's values to others that differ that one is able to validate and invalidate their beliefs.

Mark is entitled to his culture "rants." You're entitled to question him. However, I think any reasonable person reading your initial questions can infer that the questions are somewhat accusatory in nature, and presumptive that you have some idea "where [Mark is] going with these culture rants."

However, your fleshed out your motivations a bit in your second post, so I'm willing to concede that I read a bit too much into your initial comments.

I celebrate diversity, and I imagine Mark does too. I'm not attempting to speak for him or portray my "clairvoyance" by saying that. I've just read quite a bit of his posts and feel comfortable and safe by stating that. However, it doesn't mean I have to like every kook, subculture, or fringe lifestyle that's out there, either...

What makes America great, in MY opinion, is that such a divergent group of people, ideas, and lifestyles can live together in one society, usually in a very laissez-faire manner. In that respect, it's a very unique nation, compared to all the others on the face of this lil ole planet...

Personally, I find roadside attractions very appealing -- the world's largest ball of yarn (Cawker City, KS), the Roy Rogers museum in Victorville, CA (before it moved to Branson), the world's largest clam (Pismo Beach), the world's tallest thermometer and Mad Greek's diner in Baker, CA (just outside of Death Valley), the wild burros roaming the streets of Oatman, AZ, the street performers in Venice Beach, CA, the drugstore shaped like a mortar and pestel in Lexington, KY, the honkey tonk in the middle of tne desert south of Lake Havasu, garlic festivals, chili cookoffs, and spamathons, the Turkey Inn on turkey day in Turkey, TX (home of Bob Wills and the Texas Playboys, and one hell of a fun time), Eeore's Birthday party in Austin (ditto), and of course the UFO museum in Roswell, NM, to name a few off the top of my head. I have purposefully avoided mentioning sites of pure natural beauty (e.g., Yellowstone, Yosemite, Painted Desert/Petrified Forest, Grand Canyon, White Sands, etc.) which are all worth a look as well. But I wanted to concentrate on the places and events that draw a particular type of people rather than extraordinary scenery. I rarely fail to meet some very interesting people at these places and events. So if you're not fond of self-mutilating kids with purple hair who claim themselves to be "artistic", move on to something else. Chances are very good that many of them are doing it merely to get a reaction anyway. I did when I was a kid. There is so much richness in this country, so many interesting people, so many interesting and downright goofy things to see and do, that it just doesn't strike me as worthwhile to dwell too heavily on what you don't like. Rather, spend your time dwelling on what you do.

I don't mean to imply anything about Mark's specific experience, I am only speaking generally. And in general, active resistance against one sort of radical fringe or another, especially if it is not perceived to be deserved, is very likely to provoke more resistance. Think about that in the broadest terms.

*Chuckles*

Ricorun you named about four road side attractions that I've lived near/drive by on a regular basis. (Victorville, Oatman, Baker, and Havasu.) Spend a bit of time out here in the desert do ya? :)

I agree with some of Mark's comments when it comes to the "sub culture." As a regular visitor to Vegas (not the strip of course, I'm kind of a "semi-local" as it were) I've run into quite a few of these "artists" in the area. Some pretty odd folks, but hey it's they're right.

It's not my thing and I don't understand why they do. They probably don't understand why I do the things I do. Like wear Hawaiian shirts all the time, read web comics, watch anime, and play Warhammer 40K. I bet my "sub-culture" is just as wierd and "stupid" to them as theirs is to me.

extramedium?

Do with them? Nothing - why on earth should I want to?

Today I went to a baseball game - nothing more American than that, is there? It was a minor league game (Las Vegas 51s clobbered Fresno); about 4,000 or so in attendance, by my guess. Just a nice day in the sun watching some baseball.

During the intervals between innings they would play rock music. Even that I found odd - really, how many people want to listen to AC/DC on a Sunday afternoon? But the strangest thing was this kid, dressed up in the 51s staff clothing, who would get up and dance in the stands every time they did it. He couldn't have been more than 18, so the music they were playing could not have directly appealed to him - and just in case anyone was thinking he was just some random nut, on Thursday's game he were there doing the exact same thing - so, he's either a very persistent lunatic, or he's hired by the team to somehow enthuse the crowd by dancing around. My guess is the latter.

Why should this be? I can only surmise that some how, some way, whenever people gather they are supposed to have a wild time - push the envelope, step out on the edge...go for it, as it were. How about watching a baseball game, instead? Are you kidding? That is just too boring! Unless something vulgar is happening, it just ain't fun.

This is what I meant about the dreary conformity of the avant garde...the envelope has been pushed as far as it can do, other than bringing back gladiatorial contest. Given that PETA would have objections to feeding Christians to lions, I think we can safely assume that we've gone as far as we're going to go...it has become routine; hum drum. Boring as all get out.

What is sad and pathetic about it all is that the people who are involved in it still think of themselves as the independent thinkers who are challenging authority and exploring new reaches of human thought and creativity...what they are actually doing is wallowing in century-old sociological muck. Hick suggests I go to a higher priced art gallery in order to see what is really good...I've seen it; its just better made garbage.

If kids today want to challenge authority, then they'd cut their hair properly, have the tattoos removed and go out and become engineers and firemen.

Gozer,

The difference would be in how you view yourself...if you view yourself as smarter than everyone else due to your subscription to a particular sub culture, then you've got a problem... and the people I saw were just like that.

Wow Mark!

After reading your response, it was AS IF I WAS READING YOUR MIND!!!

LOL!!!

dbogdan,

Well, truth be told, our leftwing friends would assert that there isn't much mind to read...so your sort of congratulating yourself on figuring out that the sun will rise tomorrow.

:o)

Mark - I think I get what you are trying to say. These avant-gard types annoy you because you feel like they are somehow trying convey superiority. They think they are smarter than you, more stylish, more enlightened. They think they have better taste than you. They mock your way of life - the clothes you wear, the way you cut your hair, the food you eat, the lifestyle you choose. To them, you are boring, lame, suburban - conformist.

But you know better. They just THINK they are cool, when in fact they are just another kind of conformist. Their movement has been co-opted by corporations looking to extract profit from pathetic attempts to distinguish themselves as some sort of avant-guarde. Just like the greasers, the hippies, the punk rockers, the new wavers and todays culture of dissafected, unimpressed slackers with their anti-bush sidewalk art.

It's been the same story forever. Yet, it seems like its really bothering you. You go on about it like a 50's parent outraged at Elvis swiveling his hips. You've seen this movie before and you know how it turns out. Heck, based on what I read here, I'd predict a good portion of these purple haired anarchists will grow up to write conservative blogs. What's so different about this generation's rebels that irks you? Are you taking this personally?

Touché Mark!

You're self-deprecating to a fault!!!

dbogdan - I can see how my original post sent you down that path - my bad. Thanks fo given it another pass.

I appreciate that you appreciate diversity. I do too. We need a left and a right so that each can curb the others excesses and extremes. The liberals push us into new territory and the conservatives keep them in check. That's how we slowly make progress as a society.

These "freaks" are part of the machine that moves us forward. I just want people to appreciate that. We can express our values by pointing out our differences, but let's not overreach in our criticism of them. Among thousands of other things, I can tell you that we would have no internet without them - and therefore, no Blogs for Bush.

dbogdan - I can see how my original post sent you down that path - my bad. Thanks for giving it another pass.

I appreciate that you appreciate diversity. I do too. We need a left and a right so that each can curb the others excesses and extremes. The liberals push us into new territory and the conservatives keep them in check. That's how we slowly make progress as a society.

These "freaks" are part of the machine that moves us forward. I just want people to appreciate that. We can express our values by pointing out our differences, but let's not overreach in our criticism of them. Among thousands of other things, I can tell you that we would have no internet without them - and therefore, no Blogs for Bush.

Gozer, I picked up on where you live a while ago. You have an outlet mall out your way that I've stopped in on many times. When it first opened I thought, "Holy crap! What's this place doing out here in the middle of nowhere??!! Then the road construction began, and it was hellacious for years. It's still not completely done, either. What's up that??!! Lol!! Heck, after the Northridge quake LA county got the 5/118 interchange (which was totally pancaked) up and running within 12 months. You guys took years to get the 15/40 interchange right.

Just so you know, I'm really just bitching to bitch. After all, it took them at least a decade to solve the problems with the Orange Crush.

Anyway, I'm within an hour of you, traffic permitting -- and within five when not, lol! In other words, I'm on the leeward side of the foothills and I need to travel the 91 and the 15 to get to you. But I do that fairly regularly. The long and the short of it is yeah, I spend a fair amount of time out in the desert, and the river, with my boys and my toys.

I should have mentioned my girls too. I just couldn't figure out how to mention them and still be passingly poetic, lol! Besides, 50% of my girls are canines. And the rest of them aren't really mine in any legal sense. Then again, my boys aren't either. I suppose you could say the difference is my boys don't give a shit one way or the other. But with my girls (the non-canine contingent anyway), it's constantly a big issue. I don't begrudge that. At times I'm even flattered. But it is as it is. Women are so very complicated, lol!

And yes, I've encountered the Las Vegas counter-culture, although maybe to only to a limited degree. Las Vegas is not one of my favorite destinations. I still get out there on occasion, but not because I want to. I'm much more familiar with the counterculture types frequenting Hollywood, Venice, San Francisco, and Palo Alto. Also, I'm somewhat familiar with (though less recently so) with the same types in NYC and out in the Hamptons on Long Island. I grew up in Connecticut and had (and still do have, though to a lesser extent) lots of relatives and good friends sprinkled across MA, CT, the City, and east Long Island. Additionally, I spent the better part of six years in Texas. I also travel a lot across the country. I frequent cities mostly, as they are properly defined. But in a lot of them it doesn't take much more than 15 minutes or so to get out in the boonies, or at least to the borders of the boonies. And I do that every chance I get purposely. Perhaps I am not possessed of the most engaging personality in the world, but it appears that I am not possessed of the very least either. I've been in biker bars in Oakland, kicker bars in Lubbock, and gay bars in San Francisco. And needless to say, I've been to museums, curio shops, all kinds of places of regional and historical interest, as well as countless diners, stop-offs, and various other kinds of mom and pop shops throughout the country. The bottom line is the more you talk to people of various and sundry sorts -- I mean really talk to them -- the more you appreciate how much we all have in common.

Well said, Ricorun!!!

"Yep, we have a cultural scene here in Las Vegas."

Who would doubt that? with enlightened folks like you being there.

"The artworks on display were evocative of nothing more than the same, boring "modern" art we've seen for nigh on a century."

They'd make good warbloggers.

"What is sad and pathetic about it all is that the people who are involved in it still think of themselves as the independent thinkers who are challenging authority and exploring new reaches of human thought and creativity."

You know this because you talked to them right?

There are times when I can pick out posts on this site as being motivated by sarcasm and other times when I can pick them out as being motivated by sheer idiocy. Then there are times when I have a hard time distinguishing the two. An immediate case in point is Mark's comment to wit:

"If kids today want to challenge authority, then they'd cut their hair properly, have the tattoos removed and go out and become engineers and firemen."

Now, depending upon the intended context I am inclined to either laugh uproariously or I am inclined to shake my head in utter disbelief. Which is the appropriate context?

I guess I'm inclined to both shake my head and laugh. Lol!

I am an artist, AAR. Can you really imagine a world without art?

Mark, young people have always rebelled. My father hated the Beatles and predicted no one would remember them in 10 years. They played loud and rebellious music. He said that in 1963. Now the Beatles are elevator music.

I have a suspicion you were born a mature adult Mark.

*Chuckles*

Yep Ricorum you got my town nailed! I bet you've also played in my hometown of Needles. What do we have that makes us interesting? We're where Spike (Snoopy's brother) lives. I love how Charles Shultz always drew us as nothing more than a lone catus in the middle of nowhere. But I digress. ;)

I agree Mark, that those who do things because they think it makes them "more refined" or "superior" than others are the ones that are really annoying. There are those like that in every group. The Star Trek fans who think they're a true Sci-Fi fan, or the Dr. Who guys who think they are "deep" fans because it's Brittish or what not. :p

In the end, if you're doing what you like because you like it that's great! More power to ya!

It just seems that too many folks do things just to fit in or be part of a certain crowd. It's happened for generations and I bet there were Roman kids who went to watch the Lions be fed Christians because "Romulous and Remus were doing it too!" :D

extramedium,

No, I'm just commenting on how boring it all is. Perhaps it is because I've become a little older and, one hopes, a little wiser. There's this desperation in such things as I saw the other night...a wreckless striving for the next thrill, when all thrills have already been done before, and perhaps they aren't what a person should really shoot for?

I do believe I know better - and I do, also, believe that the kids I saw out there really haven't a clue what little, mental serfs they are. I'm saddened to see so much potential going to utter waste - people who could actually contribute something useful to the world instead hustling on the margins of society, able to live their lifestyle only because "square" people have created so much wealth that there's plenty leftover for the "rebels" to live off of effortlessly. I wonder, in passing, how many of these young people will end up dead or in jail - lives ruined by trying to live up to the false idol of sex, drugs and rock 'n roll?

Ash,

Young people never rebel - they do precisely what they are told to do. There is nothing quite so slavishly conformist as someone between the ages of, say, 15 to 25.

Since the vaunted start of rock back in the 50's, all kids have done is traded in their parent's instructions for those of the pop-culture corporate bosses.

I do often listen to the music from the 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's...it repeats itself endlessly, and it has become a combination of crashing bore and unpleasant R-rated movie, if you ask me. Oh, there are some good tunes out there; a few gems in the slag...but most of it is pure garbage. I think back on all those hours wasted on Led Zepplin and Van Halen, and wonder what more useful, and more enjoyable, things I might have done with my time...

The difference would be in how you view yourself...if you view yourself as smarter than everyone else due to your subscription to a particular sub culture, then you've got a problem... and the people I saw were just like that.

Ummm, this describes you perfectly Noonan. Every post in this thread is you telling the "freaks" what they should be doing in life, because you believe you are smarter than them. Therefore, as we all already figured out, YOU HAVE A PROBLEM. Self-diagnosis is rarely this good, but you nailed yourself this time.

Its funny because Noonan talks about the "freaks" he encountered as being pathetic and sad and depressing, etc. But who was the sad, depressed person that night? The freaks who were out with their friends, creating art; OR, the person who could only see the negative in everything that evening. Actually Mark, almost every post on this blog by you is negative in nature. That seems pretty sad and depressing.

then they'd cut their hair properly

What is the proper haircut? Is long hair on men acceptable? Short hair on women? Mark, please explain the proper haircut to me, I have to know if I am proper or not.

such conformist sheep

Are you claiming you are not a conformist sheep? Oh, thats right, I remember Mark talking one time about how he was a true revolutionary. He is no conformist even though he is the main writer on a blog named after someone else; where his job is to defend that person no matter what.

I do believe I know better - and I do, also, believe that the kids I saw out there really haven't a clue what little, mental serfs they are.

I thought it was wrong to think you are smarter than others. Wow, being hypocritical within the same thread. Congratulations, you are now a liar and a hypocrite. Also, could you throw in a few more stereotypes while you are at it. I think you are really more ignorant than you are letting on here.

Oh wait, here is some more stereotypes. See, I knew you were more ignorant.

able to live their lifestyle only because "square" people have created so much wealth that there's plenty leftover for the "rebels" to live off of effortlessly.

Are you claiming that all people like this contribute nothing to society? Are you claiming that none of them work and they all get welfare checks? I remember you telling me that I was a hateful person. You obviously have hatred for the people you saw on Friday. And you know what, that makes you a hypocrite again.

Ash

RE: "I am an artist, AAR. Can you really imagine a world without art?"

I have nothing against art. I like many types of art. We see art around us everywhere.

However, much of what I see today is not art. If art is subject to one's own personal interpretation, then I see and interpret much of it as pure trash and garbage. It may represent someone's untalented expression of their opinion, but from an artistic perspective, much of it is still trash!

Our liberal elitist art connoisseurs are free to choose and purchase whatever they "believe" in their opinion is art. If they believe a pile of elephant dung slung on a religions painting is art, that's their opinion -- not mine! If they want to believe sheets of cloth strung around New York City or across the hills of California is art, that's their opinion -- not mine! If they want to believe a pile of trash is art, that's their opinion -- not mine! Don't expect the American taxpayers, however, to spend their taxpayer dollars to support trash and garbage.

Most Americans have a more "traditional" view of what constitutes art. They know it when they see it, and it is NOT manure slung across a painting; it is not the American flag being dishonored and mutilated; it is not a pile of trash arranged in some manner known only to the "artist". If the art connoisseurs don't recognize a pile of trash, then ask some real experts for advice... ask their local garbage collector to judge it, but don't call it art. If the art connoisseurs want to believe that manure is art, then get some real experts to judge the works... ask the local cattle farmer, chicken rancher, horse stable cleaner, or zoo dung sweeper to judge the works, but don't expect the rest of us to call it art. I've seen better art in the piles of manure produced by cows in a field than some of the stuff produced by today's "artists"!

In their attempt to be politically correct and not upset or displease anyone, the elitist art connoisseurs themselves have created much of the negative opinion of art, and the objections to providing public funding for the arts. Stop trying to convince the rest of us that a pile of waste or trash is art.

Tell the ''artists" that their creations are not "art" and stop defending it as such. It may be some expression of their own personal opinion, but it is not art. Tell them to give up on an art career and get a job. Liberals are losing credibility with those of us who do recognize a pile of trash when we see it.

Ash, I haven't seen yours, but I might possibly think it is art.

AAR

So Mark what kind of music do you think is worth listening to? Or do you agree with aar that art is worthless and a waste of time?

Okay, you're a political junkie and I'm a photographer. Do you remember the classic photo of Adlai Stevenson and the worn hole in the bottom of his shoe? How many words could have been wasted trying to explain what that simple photo conveyed? That was a photograph elevated to art. That was art elucidating and educating and defining a man.

My answer would be no words could exactly convey that moment in time. And that is what all great art does.

Ash,

Its best not to get me started on photography - a picture is worth 1,000 words, but every one of them is a lie, because a picture, by definition, is a snapshot in time which cannot provide context. A picture of Stevenson with a hole in his shoe conveys a man who didn't check carefully before getting dressed in the morning, and nothing else UNLESS you have done a lot of additional research. I'd hate to take food off your table, but if there was one thing I could un-invent, photography would be it.

Outside of that - what kind of music is worth listening to? Oh, I suppose that would be whatever music the individual finds pleasurable. I recall once that I quoted from "Shropshire Lad" in a particular context, and I got a long essay from what must have been an English Lit major who explained to me that I was misusing the poem as Houseman was this, that and the other thing which didn't fit my usage...I replied back that once a poem - or a song - is written and placed in the public square, it no longer entirely reflects the author, but is placed into the personal context of everyone who reads/hears it...which means that a song or poem can mean one thing to you, and quite another to me.

Still, there's no denying that "Houses of the Holy" doesn't quite compare with Mozart - and my time listening to records would have been better repaid listening to the latter rather than the former.

Mark - you are like Dean Wormer, Judge Smails and Reverend Shaw Moore all wrapped up into one guy, with no apologies! I have a good idea of where you are coming from and to repeat, even though I disagree I respect your strong convictions. Thanks for the responses.

You guys need to take a philosophy class.

I replied back that once a poem - or a song - is written and placed in the public square, it no longer entirely reflects the author, but is placed into the personal context of everyone who reads/hears it...which means that a song or poem can mean one thing to you, and quite another to me.

Why can you apply this reasoning to a poem with words and not a poem with pictures? The pictures I now take are of everyday scenes that I find beautiful that you might pass by and not see. If I can help you see it, have I not made your life richer?

That is one of the great reasons FOR art. Do you realize if William Henry Jackson had not lugged his 8 X 10 view camera out west, Yellowstone may never have become a national park? People heard about it and read about it, but it wasn't until they saw the pictures that they demanded its protection.

Photography is like everything else. It can be used for good or bad reasons. Just like writing. Maybe even B4B.

Music? I'll take John Lennon's Imagine anyday.

As far as the Stevenson photo goes, yes if some young person saw that photo today they might not get it. But at the time it was published Stevenson was well known for his seriousness and hard work and desire to help the nation. This photo in 1/60th of a second encapsulated that in a way words could only imitate.

Most people see the world and there are iconic images that stay with you forever.

I still remember Jackie Kennedy holding John after he was shot. And little John John saluting his father's cason.

A black man hanging from a tree after being lynched.

The little girl running down the street hysterical and naked after a nuclear bomb was released.

These things can be captured with words, but sometimes not nearly as effectively as stark, black and white photographs.

Of course I am biased because that is the way I express myself. As Keefer always says, Ash needs to learn how to write.

As far as taking bread off my table, Mark, you'd just put it back on with your taxes when I apply for foodstamps. Ha. LOL

Ash,

And we preserved that area...while others of perhaps more vital ecological importance were destroyed because no one took a picture of them, or they didn't photogragh as well.

Photography has its place - but its most important place is in taking pictures of things we otherwise could not see at all...a molecule, or the detailed surface of Mars; things like that. When a picture is taken of something we can't ever see on our own, then it adds to knowledge...but even then it must be placed in context, which is why the Mars probes carry far more than just a camera.

As a photographer, I'm certain you've seen plenty of the old pictures - people with their wrinkled Sunday best, and very badly done hair...why is our hair better and why do we expend effort on ensuring that no wrinkles happen? Because it doesn't look good in pictures...cameras falsify...give us an imcomplete and often very shallow view of life, and what is important.

extra,

Really? I don't think so - in fact, I view myself as far more forward thinking than most alleged liberal/left people...I'm freed from leftwing dogma, and thus able to consider things on their merits without reference to a Party line...

"why is our hair better and why do we expend effort on ensuring that no wrinkles happen?"

Well see Mark once again I'd have to disagree (suprise). We look better today not because of photograpy, but by the exploitation of photograpy by marketers that merely want to make a profit. So they show photos not of Joan Citizen, but Halle Berry. Who wouldn't like to look like Halle Berry, or Elle McPherson or fill in the blank.

Well you can if you buy our product, Herbal Essence of B.S. So the medium isn't at fault. It's your free enterprise misusing the medium that is at fault.

I found an exhibit mark would like:

Entarte Kunst

Time was, art was intended to be something of beauty and something to be admired.

Much of today's most controversial "art" isn't art at all. It is nothing more than a political statement, pure and simple. More often than not, it is yet another liberal attack on religion, conservative views, or some other traditional American value.

Like today's irresponsible and disrespectful "free speech", the political "art" is not even intended to be something of beauty or to be admired. Rather, it is intended purely to express or elicit hate and anger against a person, a group, or an idea. It is deliberately intended to be as disgusting, vile, and distasteful as the "artist" can possibly make it in order to draw attention, hopefully from the liberal press.

As long as it is labeled "art", anything goes. Our liberal institutions encourage it and welcome it with open arms into their exhibits, displays, and other "events". There are no limits to what can be put on public display as long as it is called "art"!

If our elitist liberal art connoisseurs want to call that trash art, that's their right, but don't ask the American taxpayer to support their liberal propaganda efforts. Ask their wealthy liberal supporters for the funds to produce this trash and garbage.

If today's garbage is really "art", then why don't the wealthy liberal art connoisseurs buy and display the "junque" in their own mansions and work places? That would help fund and encourage "artists" to produce even more of it for their mansions where they could admire, appreciate, and revel in it's message 24/7!!!

I need my money to pay for removal of my trash and garbage, not to pay others to dump more of their disgusting and vile "art" on America.

AAR