MagiTabby wrote:The eye of the beholder.
Am I arting it yet?
MagiTabby wrote:The eye of the beholder.
There's nothing hypocritical about the phrase "My two cents". It's the same as saying, "that's my opinion". It's just making a statement. |:Nya-chan Production wrote:I'll kick you in your groins and it will produce tears in your eyes and anger with pain in your heart.
Is that art?
Also, I start to hate that hypocritic phrase "just my two cents", what I actually read is "Well, that's my opinion, it's right and you can go die in a fire for I don't care about you at all".
Man, if I collected all 2cs from these people, I'd be a kajillionaire.
MrDoctorDoctorGimmeDaNews wrote:http://www.legorobotcomics.com/comics/8.jpg
That phrase, added to a paragraph, makes it hypocritic, you know. Everybody already knows that it's your opinion. It's like shouting it away to make sure nobody attacks you and everyone gets that your opinion is the best.ArashinomeAMV wrote:There's nothing hypocritical about the phrase "My two cents". It's the same as saying, "that's my opinion". It's just making a statement. |:
:3Koopiskeva wrote:
'Good' is subjective. Therefore, only accepting 'good art' as a defining characteristic of art isn't a tighter definition whatsoever. You can talk about design elements, and all other fundamentals of 'art' but those are just guidelines for making something more appealing - those elements don't actually constitute something to be a form of art.
I know right? I mean, they could spend those two cents on a one minute international call to, umm, Canada, maybe.Nya-chan Production wrote:That phrase, added to a paragraph, makes it hypocritic, you know. Everybody already knows that it's your opinion. It's like shouting it away to make sure nobody attacks you and everyone gets that your opinion is the best.ArashinomeAMV wrote:There's nothing hypocritical about the phrase "My two cents". It's the same as saying, "that's my opinion". It's just making a statement. |:
blabbler wrote:i don't think anybody would accept 'good art' as a defining characteristic of art.
Pretty sure this implies your stance is that it has to be 'good' to be art.blabbler wrote:anyway, this is probably a dead end, it's going to be the same old 'there is good art and bad art' vs 'it has to be gooood to be art' crap.
...
it has to be gooood. so ner.
Just taking pre-emptive steps. |:blabbler wrote: i didn't talk about design elements or fundamentals of art.
i don't think we can make this into an argumentblabbler wrote: at the end of the day it doesn't make the slightest bit of difference, there are only opinions.
http://tinyurl.com/34ozadblabbler wrote:godix wrote:Even if the definition was tightened up, what does it matter? It still boils down to if you like AMVs you'll like them regardless if it's art or not. If you don't like them then labeling them as art won't make you like them.blabbler wrote:i just don't like the way the term is used so loosely - since by your criteria you may as well apply it to everything, and then what use is it?
i'm not sure what your point is, but that won't stop me from refuting your argument thusly:
http://tinyurl.com/alwxys