side by side, they kinda look the same but also look nothing alike.
it doesn't help that eddie doesn't even look like eddie in the photograph.
If I had known then what I know now...
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
It's not "bullying" to be critical of that painting. But the real point that needs to be made is that not every single Pearl Jam-related thing needs a thread on this board. So somewhere in the vast vastness of the Internet you came across a crappy painting of Eddie Vedder. Who gives a shit?
side by side, they kinda look the same but also look nothing alike.
it doesn't help that eddie doesn't even look like eddie in the photograph.
Totally true. If it wasn't context, I'm not even sure I'd immediately identify that photo as EV. Weird. The painting fails in the eyes. They make him look surprised and a little scared.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
There is nothing wrong with criticizing art. There is nothing wrong with ruthlessly criticizing art. If an artist is going to cry about his or her publicly displayed art being criticized, that's his or her problem, not the critic's.
Very strongly disagree with the second sentence.
So you disagree with art being criticised?
No, obviously not. I have very clearly stated several times that i am fine with criticism....if it is done respectfully.
But yet contradicted yourself in your previous statement.
There is nothing wrong with criticizing art. There is nothing wrong with ruthlessly criticizing art. If an artist is going to cry about his or her publicly displayed art being criticized, that's his or her problem, not the critic's.
Very strongly disagree with the second sentence.
So you disagree with art being criticised?
No, obviously not. I have very clearly stated several times that i am fine with criticism....if it is done respectfully.
But yet contradicted yourself in your previous statement.
my previous statement said I disagree with ruthlessly criticising art. how is that a contradiction?
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.
look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.
look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.
'96: Seattle: Key Arena '98: Seattle: Memorial Stadium 1 & 2 '00: Columbus: Polaris '03: Columbus: Germain '10: Columbus: Nationwide Arena '11: East Troy: Alpine Valley - PJ20 1 & 2 + EV Detroit '12: Missoula + EV Jacksonville 1 & 2 '13: Chicago / Pittsburgh / Buffalo / Seattle '14: Cincinnati / St. Louis / Tulsa / Lincoln / Memphis / Detroit / Moline '15: New York City - Global Citizen Festival '16: Greenville / Hampton / Raleigh / Columbia / Lexington / Ottawa / Toronto 1 & 2 / Wrigley 1 & 2 '17: Brooklyn - Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Induction Ceremony '18: London 1 & 2 / Seattle 1 & 2 / Missoula / Wrigley 1 '22: Nashville / St. Louis
look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.
i think stating "anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin" is a ridiculous over generalization.
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.
i think stating "anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin" is a ridiculous over generalization.
Maybe "will or needs to develop a thick skin" might be more appropriate, but damn. That post was very well-spoken and thought out.
look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.
i think stating "anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin" is a ridiculous over generalization.
As an artist, I do get what he's saying. You put it out there. Often, you've married the work that you've created, but you have to understand that other people will view things differently. I offended nearly an entire print class with a product design that I did in college. People who weren't religious were offended and I didn't get it. Why would they care? It wasn't a big deal. The prof thought it was funny. What happened? I got an A on the print and the triptych was accepted to the annual university student show that year.
Just proves that not everyone loved it, but a few people out there did. It now hangs on my living room wall.
look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.
Now I can say the painting sucked?
The worst of times..they don't phase me, even if I look and act really crazy.
look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.
i think stating "anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin" is a ridiculous over generalization.
Maybe "will or needs to develop a thick skin" might be more appropriate, but damn. That post was very well-spoken and thought out.
actually, to me, it was just a really long paragraph that basically says what we all know and have agreed upon: art can and will be criticized. the only argument made previous to that, in my mind, was that "was the critique too harsh or was it appropriate?". I found it harsh and immature. some say "have at 'er!". to me, there is also a defined difference between seeing a picture and critiquing it, and taking that image, posting it on the internet somewhere else, and making fun of it. remember someone in school who would see something you drew on paper? if he said to your face 'that's garbage", fine. But if he tore that page out of your book, posted it in the library with "piece of shit" written on it, is that not completely different?
he also argues that there's nothing wrong with saying something is bad. i agree. but mocking it is not critiquing. that is all my point has been this entire time. but people just keep reading what they wish to read. so be it.
and several times in this thread people have said "I'm sick of political correctness". I don't think saying "stop being politically correct" is really valid here. that phrase is thrown around in the incorrect context constantly, this thread included. being politically correct does not mean being nice. it just means not generalizing a group of people and using the wrong word to describe that group. like saying African American instead of black.
what people really mean these days when they say "fuck political correctness" is actually just "I can be a dick if I want to be".
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
Dammit, Hugh, you opened up a lot of doors with your post!
First, the OP conceded to a degree and changed the initial post. And even so, god forbid someone mocks! Look at all of the popular talk and comedy shows (Daily Show comes to mind) that does that, and is embraced? If it's wrong, it should be wrong all over regardless of the target.
As to PC-ness, I agree the term is over/misused (much like with "bullying" in this thread alone).
When I say fuck that, I'm not saying it as license to be an asshole. I'm saying it as a means to not tip-toe around certain words or easily-hurt feelings.
Now art, like dickishness - personal and subjective
Dammit, Hugh, you opened up a lot of doors with your post!
First, the OP conceded to a degree and changed the initial post. And even so, god forbid someone mocks! Look at all of the popular talk and comedy shows (Daily Show comes to mind) that does that, and is embraced? If it's wrong, it should be wrong all over regardless of the target.
As to PC-ness, I agree the term is over/misused (much like with "bullying" in this thread alone).
When I say fuck that, I'm not saying it as license to be an asshole. I'm saying it as a means to not tip-toe around certain words or easily-hurt feelings.
Now art, like dickishness - personal and subjective
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Dammit, Hugh, you opened up a lot of doors with your post!
First, the OP conceded to a degree and changed the initial post. And even so, god forbid someone mocks! Look at all of the popular talk and comedy shows (Daily Show comes to mind) that does that, and is embraced? If it's wrong, it should be wrong all over regardless of the target.
As to PC-ness, I agree the term is over/misused (much like with "bullying" in this thread alone).
When I say fuck that, I'm not saying it as license to be an asshole. I'm saying it as a means to not tip-toe around certain words or easily-hurt feelings.
Now art, like dickishness - personal and subjective
I stopped referencing the OP pages ago. This has become more about the ethics of harshly criticizing someone. And to be fair, he never really conceded anything except that people thought he was being a jerk.
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
Comments
it doesn't help that eddie doesn't even look like eddie in the photograph.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
The painting fails in the eyes. They make him look surprised and a little scared.
2016: Lexington and Wrigley 1
'98: Seattle: Memorial Stadium 1 & 2
'00: Columbus: Polaris
'03: Columbus: Germain
'10: Columbus: Nationwide Arena
'11: East Troy: Alpine Valley - PJ20 1 & 2 + EV Detroit
'12: Missoula + EV Jacksonville 1 & 2
'13: Chicago / Pittsburgh / Buffalo / Seattle
'14: Cincinnati / St. Louis / Tulsa / Lincoln / Memphis / Detroit / Moline
'15: New York City - Global Citizen Festival
'16: Greenville / Hampton / Raleigh / Columbia / Lexington / Ottawa / Toronto 1 & 2 / Wrigley 1 & 2
'17: Brooklyn - Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Induction Ceremony
'18: London 1 & 2 / Seattle 1 & 2 / Missoula / Wrigley 1
'22: Nashville / St. Louis
http://www.livefootsteps.org/user/?usr=170
Edit - this.
Just proves that not everyone loved it, but a few people out there did. It now hangs on my living room wall.
2016: Lexington and Wrigley 1
even if I look and act really crazy.
he also argues that there's nothing wrong with saying something is bad. i agree. but mocking it is not critiquing. that is all my point has been this entire time. but people just keep reading what they wish to read. so be it.
and several times in this thread people have said "I'm sick of political correctness". I don't think saying "stop being politically correct" is really valid here. that phrase is thrown around in the incorrect context constantly, this thread included. being politically correct does not mean being nice. it just means not generalizing a group of people and using the wrong word to describe that group. like saying African American instead of black.
what people really mean these days when they say "fuck political correctness" is actually just "I can be a dick if I want to be".
First, the OP conceded to a degree and changed the initial post. And even so, god forbid someone mocks! Look at all of the popular talk and comedy shows (Daily Show comes to mind) that does that, and is embraced? If it's wrong, it should be wrong all over regardless of the target.
As to PC-ness, I agree the term is over/misused (much like with "bullying" in this thread alone).
When I say fuck that, I'm not saying it as license to be an asshole. I'm saying it as a means to not tip-toe around certain words or easily-hurt feelings.
Now art, like dickishness - personal and subjective
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say