Fun Stuff > CHATTER
dear dude in dr zikers anthro class
Snuffletrout:
By football do you mean american football or soccer?
I have a hard time seeing someone play soccer with a tomato or melon...
tania:
--- Quote from: KharBevNor on 20 Nov 2010, 06:56 ---I know several people who have been crippled for life in rugby-related accidents; compound fractures, broken backs, legs and even hips, and one guy who got eye-gouged and now one of his eyes is just a scarred up white orb. Plus, have you ever seen what old rugby players noses and ears look like? It's like something out of Brueghel.
--- End quote ---
my sister played rugby in university and quit after she took a really bad knee to the face which broke her jaw and smashed about eight of her front teeth into crumbs. she has a whole bunch of fancy fake teeth now but at the time i was really young and this was like the scariest nightmare imaginable for me. i guess i should be glad it wasn't worse.
Ptommydski:
--- Quote from: Snuffletrout on 20 Nov 2010, 08:40 ---By football do you mean american football or soccer?
--- End quote ---
By football I mean football.
StaedlerMars:
--- Quote from: Snuffletrout on 20 Nov 2010, 08:40 ---By football do you mean american football or soccer?
I have a hard time seeing someone play soccer with a tomato or melon...
--- End quote ---
Do you have an easier time seeing someone play american football with a tomato or melon?
Also, Tommy, soccer is originally a British term to differentiate all games played on foot and with a ball from the game that is now thought of as football. So soccer isn't an incorrect term. </pedant>
KharBevNor:
There is a hierarchy of ‘metatexts’ which deeply inform how we look at art. The most obvious of these is the title. All formal works of art have a title, without exception. If the artist does not give it one, then it is automatically called ‘untitled’. This is arguably a function of the gallery system, of art criticism, art-history etc.: If works of art did not have titles, they could not be catalogued, talked about, referenced or organised conceptually. The anonymous quotation that something is art “if it's signed and you can't piss in it” (referring to Duchamp’s Fountain) should perhaps be “if it’s got a title and you can’t piss in it”, though in fact the capacity of a work to receive urine is theoretically irrelevant. This granting of a title could be said to actually transform an object into an artwork, in at least as much as we think of art as being something distinct from design, craft, etc.; or at the very least to be a definite mark that such a transformation has taken place. The matter of titles, being pieces of text, is obviously relevant to our discussion in some ways. Lawrence Weiner said that “all artist’s work has a title, titles are my work”, stripping art down to simply the titles, blown up massively on a wall; but even his work has titles, which exist separately to the pieces themselves. Titles are, however, fundamentally different to text actually incorporated into the work. The title of a work of art is separate from it, in the same way that the caption of a photograph in a newspaper is not the photograph itself, or even part of it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version