Posts by Paul Litterick
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Technically, it's a Minister for Racing. The job is to be an advocate for racing.
We should have a Minister for Pokies, as well, just to even up things.
-
. It emancipated women and improved the gene pool.
And girls look good on bicycles. All in all, a winning ideal.
-
There is a disjointed quality to National's ad that says to me "we are really quite strange people." Why the big clunky 'fast forward' symbol, which says "Seventies Hi-Fi?" Why the message "choose a brighter future" written in dark letters on a dark background, with "brighter" in darker and bolder letters? Why the bombers on a Rolling Thunder mission - is this meant to appeal to Vietmanese voters? Why the evocation of a Soft Cell song?
Take your hands off me
I don't belong to you, you see
Take a look at my face
For the last time
I never knew you
You never knew me
Say hello goodbye
Say hello wave goodbye -
The hours of leaking of amniotic fluid seems to have been plucked out of the diarist's ass to me.
Ewwww....
an image so appalling it offended Craig.
And this is what scares me about the prospect of Key and Mapp taking over the foreign policy reigns.
Reins, George, not reigns.
-
You are to be applauded for getting in touch with the male monster from Cameron Slater's Id. Somehow I imagine it to be like the monster in Forbidden Planet or Quatermass and the Pit.
Take care.
-
There's really only one criteria for the electorate when choosing a VP in the US
Really there can only be one criterion.
-
Sport is not art, cos as the esteemed Dr Litterick says, it is not intended to be so.
Not yet a Dr but it is nice to see it in writing; not likely to be a Dr if I spend too much time on forums as compelling as this one.
Yes, but (with all due respect) Paul said comedy wasn't art. And if comedy isn't art then I'm really not sure what is.
My bad. I should have chosen a better example. I meant that comedy wasn't art cinema, by which I had in mind gloomy European films in black and white and sub titles. But even some comedies are accepted as art cinema, so I should have cited something else, like porn; but that would have started the "is porn art" debate over again. So lets stick with uses of film as a medium which are not intended as art: training films, that sort of thing.
-
Hey Lyndon. Yes, it is all about intention. Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will was intended by by its director as a work of art and by its patrons as a work of propaganda; it has been received by sportsfans as a record of events and by cinemafans as a work of art. It is all these things. The director's intention to create a work of art and the art world's acceptance of her work as art are what matters.
Sporting events can be great performances without having to be classified as art. After all, the medium of film has been used for many things besides art cinema: comedies, westerns, instruction films etc. The sporting event might be a form of performance or a new, emerging category.
And some sports are less like Sport than other things: gymnastics and pool events that are judged by subjective criteria such as artistic merit, rather than objective criteria such as goals scored; beach volleyball, which is more like a Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition than a sporting contest; Dressage, which is like taking a majestic animal and making it perform tricks.
-
Matthew, I thought National had started saying No to Peters about 48 hours ago? They certainly didn't say No after the last election. It was a matter of arithmetic, not principle.
How does Hooton do this? Time after time, he says stuff that is simply not true, and he does it on National Radio and in national newspapers. Yet he keeps getting invited back to do it again.
-
To be cruel but fair about this, Sport is not Art because it is not accepted by the Art World as Art; the Art World comprises all those who have a stake in the creation and exhibition of art. The Martin Creed event was a sporting activity made into a work of art by changing its purpose from a competition to an artistic activity and by exhibiting it in an art gallery.
Sport also is not Art because it is not presented to the Art World as being so. In order for a work to be accepted as Art it must first be presented as such by the artist. Sport's purpose is not artisitic - its purpose is the winning of competitions of physical skills.Some sporting contests might appear artistic or akin to forms of art, such as gymnastics and dance; but the sporting activity and the art form have different purposes.
Some sporting activities are beautiful; but then so are trees, which are neither Sport nor Art. There are different forms of beauty, which is an entirely relative concept that changes over history and geography. What is certain is that beauty is not in the eye of the beholder; that would make the concept of beauty meaningless. Beauty is something that is agreed upon by groups, by society as a whole or elites in society. It is not the same as personal preference.
The Olympics used to include contests of singing and poetry, in accordance with its Greek origins. The works created for these contests were recognisible as works of art, and would be so recognised by the Art World. They were not like sporting activities except in the one aspect of being created for competition.
At New Zealand universities, and maybe elsewhere, the activity of debating is considered a sport. It is a competitive activity which is administered by university sports organisations and forms part of sporting festivals. Debating is not a physical activity but it is a contest. Debating is not artistic, although it may have qualities in its execution that are shared by works of art, such as eloquence. Debating is similar to other activities, such as parliamentary debate, but not identical to them. It is essentially a game, although it shares features with other activities that are not games.
So, if debating is not physical, is it a sport? Yes, because the Sport World considers it so, at least in New Zealand. Is it Art? No, because it is not presented as such by its participants and because it is not recognised as such by the Art World.