Friday Ephemeraren’t

Ran across this on You Tube the other night. If anyone here is a fight fan of the 1970s or even a passing interest in Muhammed Ali’s career, this was an episode of This Is Your Life. Was filmed in a studio in the UK and even has an appearance by the UK heavyweight who fought him. I vaguely remembered the guy but can’t recall the name right now. It’s about 45 minutes long. I thoroughly enjoyed it. And I was more of a Joe Frasier fan back then myself.
https://youtu.be/ZWZOBX1vE7A
Also, anyone else have this problem? On the rare occasion I start a sentence with the word “Ran” (note the capitalization) it looks foreign to me. Damn that Kurosawa.

They are more limber than you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=230&v=jutuEhkSnCU

They are more limber than you
I think I hurt myself watching that.

R Sherman. I have a visceral dislike for post-modernism, but that article didn’t seem to propose a solution.
Apart from name dropping Jung, which is exactly the wanky way post-modernists behave, it merely stated some positions without evidence.
My view is that there’s lots of good art out there, just not in museums. Just as the internet freed us from having the ability to only follow one or two providers of politics (a daily, a weekly and a TV channel), so increasing wealth exposes all of us to much more art. Which we don’t see in museums, because few among us go to museums of post-modern art (whereas exhibitions of earlier artists are often sell-out hits).
I’m also unconvinced Banksy is post-modern. I don’t always agree with his messages, but it’s not “difficult”or esoteric and it’s usually representational. If he spouts “art bollox”, then I’ve been spared it. That places him rather at odds with Koons, Hirst, Emim, etc.
He also doesn’t do work for museums. Sure, they’ve latched on to him, but then they can’t have popular representational art wandering off the reservation, can they?

a discussion of Postmodern “Art.”
Re pseudo-art, or art that retreats entirely into intellectual pretension, this came to mind:

The pretence of intellectual heft and critical discernment is quite funny, given the unspoken rules of pretend artists and their pretend art. Like practically all of her fellow hustlers, Ms Schaefer tells us that she “investigates” and “questions” things, and presumably interrogates them; but despite this allegedly relentless curiosity, I doubt that any specific insight or profundity is ever conveyed to her audience, such as it is, via the art, such as it is. And of course, we’re not supposed to notice this, or notice the comical mismatch of arch rhetoric and inept flummery. And so, in order to feign discernment, one has to not discern any number of really obvious things.

Which is why I say the audience is marginally more interesting than the art, at least insofar as you might be puzzled by why they’re there, often looking faintly bored, and not doing something else.

Score update Collingwood are up 23 points end of the first quarter. Brilliant team effort against the flag favourites.

Old Fart Collingwood extend lead to 44 points at half time. Awesome to watch, may end up drunk by the end of the match

Collingwood v Richmond
Ah, the International Men’s Embroidery Finals. It’s all very exciting.

Daniel — that is irrelevant. Is he post-modern?
(Whedon works in comics. High level writing is not required. Just like who cares that Jack Kirby isn’t exactly Picasso?
I’d accept being as crap as Whedon allegedly is, if I could make the money he does doing it.)

Re pseudo-art, or art that retreats entirely into intellectual pretension . . .
Postmodern art, like postmodern academic prose or anything to which the prefix “postmodern” is appended, is not designed to convey anything meaningful. As someone once said–quoted here, I think, but I’m too lazy to look it up–the purpose is to bludgeon the observer into abject submission, the submission being pretending one’s looking at something profound while secretly knowing it’s shit. Stated differently, it preys on those who fear being labeled “nekulturny.”
I have a visceral dislike for post-modernism, but that article didn’t seem to propose a solution.
Agreed, though I don’t know what the solution is, beyond finding and supporting good art. The fact is, the “arts” world has been completely compromised by the postmodernists who suck all the air from the room leaving little or none for the quality artists who create beautiful things in relative obscurity. Museum curators know it’s easier to those coveted cocktail party invitations the “edgier” one is, and you can always rely on the Monet exhibitions to pay the bills.

Hate fact. https://twitter.com/OrwellNGoode/status/1043125039858688000

When I see the “we” I’m like, did I miss an election or something?

I seriously believe we need to have single-sex schools from about 6-12th grade.

The fact is, the “arts” world has been completely compromised by the postmodernists who suck all the air from the room leaving little or none for the quality artists who create beautiful things in relative obscurity.
This is a huge part of the reason why I gravitate toward the “practical arts.” I can spend days admiring beautiful objects crafted from wood or silver or wrought iron or glass. Show me a gate with beautiful scrollwork, which is lovely to the eye while still functioning as a gate. Show me a crystal decanter with beautiful curves that looks lovely on a table and yet also fits perfectly in one’s hand and pours without spilling a drop. Give me a stained-glass window that dazzles in the evening sun.
And when you meet talented artisans, they can show pride in their work, but they’re never so proud that they disappear up their own posteriors. They also tend to support others, being far more likely to say, “I’d love to help you learn my techniques” instead of proclaiming that “my techniques are far too complex and abstract for you mere mortals to ever understand.”
You can keep your artists; I’ll be over here hanging out with the craftsmen.

“… can one of you lovely Brits please explain the context of that billboard?”
Honestly, I’m not sure myself. I think it’s meant to be vaguely threatening. It may have something to do with their magic detector vans.
“You can keep your artists; I’ll be over here hanging out with the craftsmen.”
Amen to that. “High art” is a relatively recent invention anyway. In Latin, ars, artis is just man-made stuff. The idea that Art must impart a message or move the consumer emotionally to be worthy of the title is a load of bollocks thought up by people who can’t make anything useful. To me, great art is anything that performs its intended function well. All else being equal, beauty trumps ugliness, and yes, its function may simply be to move, but it doesn’t have to be.
Most of the hamfisted political propaganda masquerading as Art these days doesn’t even do that. But by these criteria, in the developed world we’re surrounded by great art to an extent never known before in history. Maybe that’s why we turn to pointless wank instead: when we take the competence of those who make things for granted, we no longer appreciate it.
You might get a kick out of this. That’s an artist, right there.

I think it’s meant to be vaguely threatening.
Which is how you want an extortion-funded state broadcaster to be.

WTP, ACT, it was Henry Cooper.

Apparently, this is a gulper eel.

Do your henchlesbians do spinal realignment? Threw it out after the Collingwood win. And is the bar open at 8am? Asking for a friend

Ah jabrwok, Aussie slang will open many amazing doors for you. “Flat out like a lizard drinking”, and “So crooked he could hide behind a corkscrew” come to mind immediately.

“Why do you hate the media?”
Vicarious titillation.
Metropolitan policing.
Enrichment.

Total silence from feminists in 3… 2…
Ah, but it’s not the kind of “toxic masculinity” that white, middle-class feminists choose to find of interest.

Well, here’s a lovely professor I want to teach my grandsons.
(which was in response to this)