Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    possibly.
    It is acceptable full stop on an internet forum
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blamps)
    It was written in the 18th century and is very thou shalt etc. but, it is a recognised classic...it is very,very long....I have read a few hundred pages of it although I can assure you it requires patience
    but terry and kevin down the off licence would think it was posh old fashioned *******s so it must be badly written, elitist and poor, least to say, not a classic at all, right?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blamps)
    It is acceptable full stop on an internet forum
    i would say less so on this medium.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    and not because they are wonderful creations that you would never see today? why do we marvel at great paintings? appreciate classical composition? architecture, construction? because we are unable to recreate it.
    are you purposely avoiding subjectivity? if you sent modern literature back to the 19th century they would laugh at it, because it was so poor. a classic is defined by the high regard in which it is held over centuries.
    im surprised you even have the guts to flout such a ridiculous and humanly-repressed observation.
    You would never see them today, because the world has improved. It has built on them, and become better.
    We are perfectly able to recreate it, but we don't because there is no need.
    They would laugh, only because they are not at a stage where they can appreciate such works.

    (Original post by vienna95)
    dumbing down usually refers to the reduction of quality to please the masses. youve hit the nail on the head. you argument proves this.
    The quality has improved. Quality isn't about inaccessability, unreadability, or all these other things that prevent people from reading these stupid and outdated books. It is about readability, clarity of communication etc. things that modern books do well, and practically no old books do.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    a ha, i wondered how long the real motivation would come out..
    cant understand 'them funny words? they talk funny in the books do they..?

    grow up.
    I was saying that you seem to have the inability to understand anything modern.
    I am perfectly capable of understanding the antiquated style of writing and communication.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iluvatar)
    You would never see them today, because the world has improved. It has built on them, and become better.
    We are perfectly able to recreate it, but we don't because there is no need.
    They would laugh, only because they are not at a stage where they can appreciate such works.
    i really urge anyone else reading this to reply..


    The quality has improved. Quality isn't about inaccessability, unreadability, or all these other things that prevent people from reading these stupid and outdated books. It is about readability, clarity of communication etc. things that modern books do well, and practically no old books do.
    PLEASE REPLY if you believe you have a brain....
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    i really urge anyone else reading this to reply..




    PLEASE REPLY if you believe you have a brain....
    Can't you argue the point on your own?

    Anyway, i've got other things to do, so you don't have to worry about not being able to defend your antiquated point of view any more.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iluvatar)
    Can't you argue the point on your own?

    Anyway, i've got other things to do, so you don't have to worry about not being able to defend your antiquated point of view any more.
    im just getting over what you wrote...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iluvatar)
    Quality isn't about inaccessability, unreadability, or all these other things that prevent people from reading these stupid and outdated books. It is about readability, clarity of communication etc. things that modern books do well, and practically no old books do.
    You can not be serious. Are you seriously trying to tell me that the old masterpieces are obsolete? Do you actually think about these things before you say them?

    Can you tell me, with a straight face, that Tom Clancy is a better writer than Shakespeare? Or that we should all throw the works of Descartes and Plato into a big bonfire and pick up Harry Potter instead?

    For someone with a self-proclaimed IQ of 196, you sure are ignorant.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    are you purposely avoiding subjectivity? if you sent modern literature back to the 19th century they would laugh at it, because it was so poor. a classic is defined by the high regard in which it is held over
    Excuse me, I happen to think some of the modern literature of today is highly stimulating and could rank up with some of the classic authours that produced works of brilliance. For example Beloved by Tony Morrision, is an amazing book no doubt, and is just as any classic.

    Vienna (and Illuvator), Your seem to think your somehow right over the issue, art is something of an opinion, one mans amazement at art or literature is anothers bewilderment about how it could ever be called art! Surely, you should just respect each others views and understand that art is something we view from a personal level, it should not be subject to one opinion.

    I happen to think the Tate modern art is good (some of), and you think it is crap, what is to say who is right? Who are you to judge that opinion? Both are right from our personal perspectives..
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr White)
    You can not be serious. Are you seriously trying to tell me that the old masterpieces are obsolete? Do you actually think about these things before you say them?

    Can you tell me, with a straight face, that Tom Clancy is a better writer than Shakespeare? Or that we should all throw the works of Descartes and Plato into a big bonfire and pick up Harry Potter instead?

    For someone with a self-proclaimed IQ of 196, you sure are ignorant.
    Descarte and Plato's ideas were flawed, and many of there ideas have been picked apart, soo... lets all read HP!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by corey)
    Excuse me, I happen to think some of the modern literature of today is highly stimulating and could rank up with some of the classic authours that produced works of brilliance. For example Beloved by Tony Morrision, is an amazing book no doubt, and is just as any classic.

    Vienna (and Illuvator), Your seem to think your somehow right over the issue, art is something of an opinion, one mans amazement at art or literature is anothers bewilderment about how it could ever be called art! Surely, you should just respect each others views and understand that art is something we view from a personal level, it should not be subject to one opinion.

    I happen to think the Tate modern art is good (some of), and you think it is crap, what is to say who is right? Who are you to judge that opinion? Both are right from our personal perspectives..
    everyone has a right to an opinion as i have acknowledged, what i am stressing is that the craft of art and literature in our times is not comparable to that of the previous centuries. the art in Tate Modern requires no skill. whether you appreciate skill or not is one thing and that is your opinion, but you cannot compare Detaille's - La Reve , a favourite of mine, to anything that Damien Hurst thinks about in his sleep.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by corey)
    Descarte and Plato's ideas were flawed, and many of there ideas have been picked apart, soo... lets all read HP!
    It does not matter whether their ideas have been proved wrong or not, these men were geniuses of their time, and we should all read their works in order to aspire to them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by corey)
    Descarte and Plato's ideas were flawed, and many of there ideas have been picked apart, soo... lets all read HP!
    so they are not classics?
    there are men today that would be able to acheive the same degree of influence?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Does art in the tate modern really require no skill? What about the idea forumilation, the meaning it portrays, what it is trying to bring about in its viewer, what is says about life/society/etc.

    I never said they werent classics, but again what you term as a classic peice of literature/art is opinion based. I think there are plenty of other philosophers more worthy of reading.

    Also, you can hardly compare the influence of modern philosopher against those of the old times. They were the intial question askers, they had the theorys to devise, all the questions to ask... the modern philosopher takes a different role to that. There influence is less but it is a stupid comparasion to make.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    everyone has a right to an opinion as i have acknowledged, what i am stressing is that the craft of art and literature in our times is not comparable to that of the previous centuries. the art in Tate Modern requires no skill. whether you appreciate skill or not is one thing and that is your opinion, but you cannot compare Detaille's - La Reve , a favourite of mine, to anything that Damien Hurst thinks about in his sleep.
    Exhibit 1 - The roof of the Sistine Chapel - Michelangelo, circa 1508
    or
    Exhibit 2 - An Unmade Bed - Tracy Emin, circa 1999

    Not really a competition, is it?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr White)
    Exhibit 1 - The roof of the Sistine Chapel - Michelangelo, circa 1508
    or
    Exhibit 2 - An Unmade Bed - Tracy Emin, circa 1999

    Not really a competition, is it?
    In your view... perhaps the unmade bed commicates more to someone than a pretty peice of aritechture...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by corey)
    In your view... perhaps the unmade bed commicates more to someone than a pretty peice of aritechture...
    Michelangelo was a genius - Tracy Emin is a yuppie opportunist with drug problems and a low IQ.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by corey)
    Does art in the tate modern really require no skill? What about the idea forumilation, the meaning it portrays, what it is trying to bring about in its viewer, what is says about life/society/etc.
    how does an empty room with a light going on and off require skill. what joe ordinary could not do that? if you find things in this, then by all means appreciate it, but you are pushing the arty card too far in comparing some pottery by a transvestite to the canvases of Manet.

    I never said they werent classics, but again what you term as a classic peice of literature/art is opinion based. I think there are plenty of other philosophers more worthy of reading.
    classic usually means distinct by its high standard. whether you agree with Descartes or Plato is irrelevant...
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    OH YES I FORGET AND IQ MEANS EVERYTHING!

    Please go back to your intellecutal world where you are a genius and you look down on others.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.