6 ms·

We went from Shakespeare to "lighght." It's hard to see that as anything other than a decline.

by ARandomerDude 6y ago

fiblye 6y ago
There's room for many kinds of art in this world. Minimalism has earned its own space.
- 082349872349872 6y ago
  On maximalism, english wouldn't be suitable, but I wonder if there are any agglutinative languages productive enough to generate a potentially infinite one-word poem? (the opposite would be an infinite number —easily done via implied cyclicity[1]— of single-grapheme poems, which probably requires an asiatic script) [1] are there any mobius-strip spin 1/2 fermionic stories? they'd reconnect, but with a twist, so every other reading has a different interpretation...
  - SuoDuanDao 6y ago
    There is a potentially infinite one-word poem in English actually, so long as one is allowed hyphens: "police" can be both a noun or a verb. 'Police-police' are police who police the police. Police whose job it is to police the police-police are police-police-police, etc. Any number of recursions would be possible. Regarding your idea of fermionic stories, I think King's Dark Tower series might be close, though I may be misunderstanding the concept...
    - psyc 6y ago
      Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo. Meaning that buffalo in Buffalo whom other buffalo in Buffalo do buffalo, also buffalo other buffalo in Buffalo that still other buffalo in Buffalo do buffalo.
- tgv 6y ago
  That requires a lot of goodwill from the reader: "I'm going to try to find this interesting because it's supposed to be a poem." Suppose you find a scrap of paper with the text (which I'm sure you haven't seen before): I withdraw and wait. This is time that doesn't get lost: each minute becomes future. I am an ocean of waiting, in a waterproof envelope of now. (*) Or you'd find a scrap of paper with the text lighght Isn't there a difference? I can appreciate the attempt in the latter, I think the "cricket" one is at least funny, but can it withstand comparison with Shakespeare? It's not a coincidence that the the article starts with the mention of Oulipo: it's word play, the joy of expressing under extreme constraints, rather than poetry. (*) Source: Eb (English: Ebb) by M. Vasalis, in a loose translation.
  - fiblye 6y ago
    Here are two paintings. [1] https://cdn8.openculture.com/2018/08/22215450/sciencde-and-charity-e1535002340741.jpg https://cdn8.openculture.com/2018/08/22215450/sciencde-and-c... [2] https://painting-planet.com/images/9/image293.jpg https://painting-planet.com/images/9/image293.jpg Painting [1] demonstrates a mastery of light, shadow, and color. It's complicated. It's full of detail. Anybody who walked by this in an art gallery would surely think, "This person is a great artist" and move on. Painting [2] will most likely be called a great painting by most people, but that's because most people have seen it at some point and know who painted it. This person has a massive reputation as one of the greatest artists of all time. People who walk by this in a museum will stop and snap a picture and take a minute to really look at it because, hey, this guy is super famous, so he must be great. But [2] is clearly painted much faster than [1] and has far less fine detail. A person who doesn't know anything about painting [2] or the artist behind it will probably say something like "anyone could do this. Even I could do that"--but it was a revolutionary style at the time because people didn't do it. [1] was merely fitting into a more established framework of art and was far less likely to blow minds, even though a typical person without foreknowledge might be more likely to compliment [1] on being a "good" painting than [2]. And many might know this, but [1] was painted by the artist when he was a child. [2] was painted by him as a full-fledged artist as an adult. The reduction in realism and complexity in favor of abstraction was an intentional progression for his work. These simple poems don't need to be as complex as Shakespeare. They're not trying to be. They serve an entirely different purpose. People are still writing long, epic poems even today, but it's a vastly explored field of art and demand for new material in that style is quite low. Not every one word poem is going to be mind-blowing, but some definitely grab some interest. There are plenty of people, even well-read people, who find Shakespeare tedious. There are people who think a page with nothing but "cricket" is fluff. Both kinds of art can coexist.
fnordian_slip 6y ago
That viewpoint seems unnecessarily narrow. It's like saying we are in a decline because we went from Caspar David Friedrich to Banksy. It's perfectly valid not to like it even want to understand someone's work, as art is always subjective imho, but it feels weird to try to grade it on a scale. I generally prefer Greek sculpture as an art form, and will probably walk by 90% of any modern art museum without stopping. But that doesn't mean I won't be moved by some of the exhibitions, possibly even more than by the "Wanderer über dem Nebelmeer" or the "Nike of Samothrake".
- Causality1 6y ago
  If the general direction of the art world is "going from Caspar David Friedrich to Banksy" then yes, we are in a decline. A landscape painter contributes more to human culture than the patron saint of edgy 14-year-olds who've just discovered powerful people tend to be assholes.
  - rbecker 6y ago
    That's not being fair to Banksy, as his work, whatever you might think of it, is at least an improvement from the likes of Mark Rothko.
    - NoOneNew 6y ago
      Banksy is a profiteer. He has his own "team" that verifies his work. Come on. He's just a graphic designer that figured out how to make better money off people who are anti-system because it's the cool thing to do. If he really gave a shit about "the causes", theres a good saying that sums it up. You do more good from changing the system from within, rather than throwing pebbles at the windows.
      - notduncansmith 6y ago
        Changing the system within is like running barefoot after the fellow who just stole your shoes. I’ll take the rocks and a slingshot, thanks.
goto11 6y ago
I don't get this desire to rank everything on the same scale. Its like comparing a Wagner opera-cycle to a Robert Johnson song. What measures are you using for this ranking and what is even the purpose? I think if you care about poetry you would enjoy both Shakespeare and minimalism. Come on, the "crickets" poem is hilarious! Here is a minimalist poem called "Swans seen through tears" (by S. Grotrian): 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 But how do you rank it against say a speech in one of the lesser Shakespeare plays? (I'm also fond of the minimalist short story genre. Hemingway wrote a famous one in just six words.)
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  A link to that hemmingway might have been good. I'll punt; something like "he rode off into the sunset". Close?
  - Stratoscope 6y ago
    For sale: baby shoes, never worn. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_sale:_baby_shoes,_never_worn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_sale:_baby_shoes,_never_wo...
    - goto11 6y ago
      Apparently the attribution to Hemingway is apocryphal. Good story though.
    - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
      Not even close. Thanks for the link. In return, something almost as short and sad https://theoatmeal.com/comics/oracle https://theoatmeal.com/comics/oracle

We went from Shakespeare to "lighght." It's hard to see that as anything other than a decline.

fiblye 6y ago

There's room for many kinds of art in this world. Minimalism has earned its own space.

082349872349872 6y ago
On maximalism, english wouldn't be suitable, but I wonder if there are any agglutinative languages productive enough to generate a potentially infinite one-word poem? (the opposite would be an infinite number —easily done via implied cyclicity[1]— of single-grapheme poems, which probably requires an asiatic script) [1] are there any mobius-strip spin 1/2 fermionic stories? they'd reconnect, but with a twist, so every other reading has a different interpretation...
- SuoDuanDao 6y ago
  There is a potentially infinite one-word poem in English actually, so long as one is allowed hyphens: "police" can be both a noun or a verb. 'Police-police' are police who police the police. Police whose job it is to police the police-police are police-police-police, etc. Any number of recursions would be possible. Regarding your idea of fermionic stories, I think King's Dark Tower series might be close, though I may be misunderstanding the concept...
  - psyc 6y ago
    Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo. Meaning that buffalo in Buffalo whom other buffalo in Buffalo do buffalo, also buffalo other buffalo in Buffalo that still other buffalo in Buffalo do buffalo.
tgv 6y ago
That requires a lot of goodwill from the reader: "I'm going to try to find this interesting because it's supposed to be a poem." Suppose you find a scrap of paper with the text (which I'm sure you haven't seen before): I withdraw and wait. This is time that doesn't get lost: each minute becomes future. I am an ocean of waiting, in a waterproof envelope of now. (*) Or you'd find a scrap of paper with the text lighght Isn't there a difference? I can appreciate the attempt in the latter, I think the "cricket" one is at least funny, but can it withstand comparison with Shakespeare? It's not a coincidence that the the article starts with the mention of Oulipo: it's word play, the joy of expressing under extreme constraints, rather than poetry. (*) Source: Eb (English: Ebb) by M. Vasalis, in a loose translation.
- fiblye 6y ago
  Here are two paintings. [1] https://cdn8.openculture.com/2018/08/22215450/sciencde-and-charity-e1535002340741.jpg https://cdn8.openculture.com/2018/08/22215450/sciencde-and-c... [2] https://painting-planet.com/images/9/image293.jpg https://painting-planet.com/images/9/image293.jpg Painting [1] demonstrates a mastery of light, shadow, and color. It's complicated. It's full of detail. Anybody who walked by this in an art gallery would surely think, "This person is a great artist" and move on. Painting [2] will most likely be called a great painting by most people, but that's because most people have seen it at some point and know who painted it. This person has a massive reputation as one of the greatest artists of all time. People who walk by this in a museum will stop and snap a picture and take a minute to really look at it because, hey, this guy is super famous, so he must be great. But [2] is clearly painted much faster than [1] and has far less fine detail. A person who doesn't know anything about painting [2] or the artist behind it will probably say something like "anyone could do this. Even I could do that"--but it was a revolutionary style at the time because people didn't do it. [1] was merely fitting into a more established framework of art and was far less likely to blow minds, even though a typical person without foreknowledge might be more likely to compliment [1] on being a "good" painting than [2]. And many might know this, but [1] was painted by the artist when he was a child. [2] was painted by him as a full-fledged artist as an adult. The reduction in realism and complexity in favor of abstraction was an intentional progression for his work. These simple poems don't need to be as complex as Shakespeare. They're not trying to be. They serve an entirely different purpose. People are still writing long, epic poems even today, but it's a vastly explored field of art and demand for new material in that style is quite low. Not every one word poem is going to be mind-blowing, but some definitely grab some interest. There are plenty of people, even well-read people, who find Shakespeare tedious. There are people who think a page with nothing but "cricket" is fluff. Both kinds of art can coexist.

fnordian_slip 6y ago

That viewpoint seems unnecessarily narrow. It's like saying we are in a decline because we went from Caspar David Friedrich to Banksy. It's perfectly valid not to like it even want to understand someone's work, as art is always subjective imho, but it feels weird to try to grade it on a scale. I generally prefer Greek sculpture as an art form, and will probably walk by 90% of any modern art museum without stopping. But that doesn't mean I won't be moved by some of the exhibitions, possibly even more than by the "Wanderer über dem Nebelmeer" or the "Nike of Samothrake".

Causality1 6y ago
If the general direction of the art world is "going from Caspar David Friedrich to Banksy" then yes, we are in a decline. A landscape painter contributes more to human culture than the patron saint of edgy 14-year-olds who've just discovered powerful people tend to be assholes.
- rbecker 6y ago
  That's not being fair to Banksy, as his work, whatever you might think of it, is at least an improvement from the likes of Mark Rothko.
  - NoOneNew 6y ago
    Banksy is a profiteer. He has his own "team" that verifies his work. Come on. He's just a graphic designer that figured out how to make better money off people who are anti-system because it's the cool thing to do. If he really gave a shit about "the causes", theres a good saying that sums it up. You do more good from changing the system from within, rather than throwing pebbles at the windows.
    - notduncansmith 6y ago
      Changing the system within is like running barefoot after the fellow who just stole your shoes. I’ll take the rocks and a slingshot, thanks.

goto11 6y ago

I don't get this desire to rank everything on the same scale. Its like comparing a Wagner opera-cycle to a Robert Johnson song. What measures are you using for this ranking and what is even the purpose? I think if you care about poetry you would enjoy both Shakespeare and minimalism. Come on, the "crickets" poem is hilarious! Here is a minimalist poem called "Swans seen through tears" (by S. Grotrian): 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 But how do you rank it against say a speech in one of the lesser Shakespeare plays? (I'm also fond of the minimalist short story genre. Hemingway wrote a famous one in just six words.)

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
A link to that hemmingway might have been good. I'll punt; something like "he rode off into the sunset". Close?
- Stratoscope 6y ago
  For sale: baby shoes, never worn. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_sale:_baby_shoes,_never_worn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_sale:_baby_shoes,_never_wo...
  - goto11 6y ago
    Apparently the attribution to Hemingway is apocryphal. Good story though.
  - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
    Not even close. Thanks for the link. In return, something almost as short and sad https://theoatmeal.com/comics/oracle https://theoatmeal.com/comics/oracle