Can art be repulsive?

What is art? What is beauty?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Can art be repulsive?

Post by Greta » Mon Nov 09, 2015 8:20 am

Walker wrote:
Greta wrote:"Repulsiveness" is subjective. Obviously. There is no "absolute repulsiveness". I didn't think I've given that impression.

Merzbow is art BTW, just not art to most people's taste.
Hello.

In out-noising the head noise of machines in order to comment on the sensory blend-into-babble of technology, or enabled by technology, subtle it ain’t. It’s only art in the sense that philosophically it challenges the assumption of ubiquitous beauty, and it challenges the empirical life experience of realizing that beauty is a discovery of what is always present. The noise of Merzbow dares one to look away from the truth of what it is, and for non-blinkers who live by truth, it presents an empty challenge.
Merzbow is at least richer art than a great deal of popular music. It's clear that his noise shows are a visceral experience, an abstracted version of the standard extravaganza of overpowering sound and lights in modern youth concerts. I've been to experimental noise shows - it's worth doing once just for the weirdness of the experience. It's too harsh for me personally but I can see how it could appeal to some.

I wouldn't think of noise music as necessarily a challenge to the idea that beauty can be found everywhere. Noise artists enjoy the liberation and exploration.

Walker
Posts: 7265
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Can art be repulsive?

Post by Walker » Tue Nov 10, 2015 4:04 am

Greta wrote:
Walker wrote:
Greta wrote:"Repulsiveness" is subjective. Obviously. There is no "absolute repulsiveness". I didn't think I've given that impression.

Merzbow is art BTW, just not art to most people's taste.
Hello.

In out-noising the head noise of machines in order to comment on the sensory blend-into-babble of technology, or enabled by technology, subtle it ain’t. It’s only art in the sense that philosophically it challenges the assumption of ubiquitous beauty, and it challenges the empirical life experience of realizing that beauty is a discovery of what is always present. The noise of Merzbow dares one to look away from the truth of what it is, and for non-blinkers who live by truth, it presents an empty challenge.
Merzbow is at least richer art than a great deal of popular music. It's clear that his noise shows are a visceral experience, an abstracted version of the standard extravaganza of overpowering sound and lights in modern youth concerts. I've been to experimental noise shows - it's worth doing once just for the weirdness of the experience. It's too harsh for me personally but I can see how it could appeal to some.

I wouldn't think of noise music as necessarily a challenge to the idea that beauty can be found everywhere. Noise artists enjoy the liberation and exploration.
Yes, liberation. To oppose the noise is to oppose reality. To impose desire upon reality is to disturb the noise. Exploration mirrors the freedom of doing what you want, when you want. Such freedom is free of want, people like to think they want such freedom.

Walker
Posts: 7265
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Can art be repulsive?

Post by Walker » Wed Nov 11, 2015 8:08 am

Charles Laughton turned repulsion into art

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll_-pnX ... 9b&index=8

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests