anatess2 Posted August 25, 2017 Report Share Posted August 25, 2017 4 hours ago, JohnsonJones said: Personally...yes...I do. However, I'm not going to judge anyone in that regard other than myself. I have never watched Schindler's list because of that...despite having many people urge me to watch it and even one particular Stake President having a screening of it at the Stake building. Does that make me a fanatic...maybe. I try to avoid many things in media though. I heard this in conference once that if we would not feel comfortable letting our little children watch something, it is probably inappropriate for us...regardless of rating. I remember that often. What I expect of myself is not necessarily what any of you need or even should adhere to. For me personally, I would consider that pornographic though. I don't need to see a reenactment of the story of David and Bathsheba to understand what went on there... Just like I don't need to see a bloody and gory retelling of the story of Diana and then the slaughter of the city and all it's details to realize the evils done and the story and what it is telling us. To each their own though. Which is EXACTLY the point of "self-censorship". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeuroTypical Posted August 25, 2017 Report Share Posted August 25, 2017 (edited) 19 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said: Either way, it is clearly nonsense to say that someone who's good at faking emotion must be a sociopath. Take an actor. It is a craft. The script calls for you to yell in anger and you so you tighten up your face and yell, letting some spittle fly. 1. For every sociopath out there faking emotion, there are a million regular folks moving through life, in denial about their emotional baggage. Unable or unwilling to recognize the emotions they are truly having, driven by fear or denial or anger or shame to present themselves as being driven by motives or emotions considered safer, more pure. Sometimes, we are so good at it, we even convince ourselves. 2. When it comes to actors, the ability to "emote" as needed is a valuable skill. There are many different ways to do it, and they range from being fake to being genuine. I'm told the best actors pull from emotions already in them, which they load into their emote gun and fire at the camera at the right times. (Full disclosure - I'm told this by the actors right after they won some award - so they may be full of crap.) Edited August 25, 2017 by NeuroTypical Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Folk Prophet Posted August 25, 2017 Report Share Posted August 25, 2017 13 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said: 1. For every sociopath out there faking emotion, there are a million regular folks moving through life, in denial about their emotional baggage. Unable or unwilling to recognize the emotions they are truly having, driven by fear or denial or anger or shame to present themselves as being driven by motives or emotions considered safer, more pure. Sometimes, we are so good at it, we even convince ourselves. I deny the denial of emotional baggage! 14 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said: 2. When it comes to actors, the ability to "emote" as needed is a valuable skill. There are many different ways to do it, and they range from being fake to being genuine. I'm told the best actors pull from emotions already in them, which they load into their emote gun and fire at the camera at the right times. (Full disclosure - I'm told this by the actors right after they won some award - so they may be full of crap.) Honestly I can only speak about acting in the theoretical as I do not act for the most part. What I can speak to is music...both performance and writing...and I know that my emotional attachment to either isn't the making or breaking issue as to the artistry of it. NeuroTypical 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted August 25, 2017 Report Share Posted August 25, 2017 (edited) On 8/25/2017 at 4:04 AM, SilentOne said: How do you know I'm not a highly qualified psychiatrist? I don't. You might very well be. What I do know though is that many people who do throw the terms around are not. Edited August 28, 2017 by MormonGator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeuroTypical Posted August 25, 2017 Report Share Posted August 25, 2017 7 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said: What I can speak to is music...both performance and writing...and I know that my emotional attachment to either isn't the making or breaking issue as to the artistry of it. Indeed! It's the easiest thing in the world for me to imagine: A piano recital just ended. The audience is moved to tears at the beautiful, life-changing emotional performance they've just been blessed to witness. They switch between applause and kleenex, some openly blubbering. Two of them will return to full activity in the church because of how much the Spirit spoke to them through the music. One couple will remember this night as the night they fell in love with each other. The piano player sits there seeing the impact his music has had. And he's grateful he was able to achieve the desired effect. Because just because he went on stage, it dawned on him he left the stove on, and it stressed the crap of him for the entire performance. He's sort of hoping the applause will die down so he can flee the stage and text his neighbor. Artists. The Folk Prophet and zil 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted August 29, 2017 Report Share Posted August 29, 2017 On 8/24/2017 at 10:54 AM, Carborendum said: Respectfully, I don't believe that is what he would say. If he really is as gifted as you say, and he understands my question, I believe he will say something else. Ok this is Anatess's Son you guys are talking about. I've been busy but now I can give my input. My mother had some things a little off so I guess I'll clarify. Expression and technique are closely related and neither are the "Art" in Art. In it's basic form, music is literally just sound organized in time. Visual Art is just paint on canvas or some specifically shaped marble. The people are what makes it alive in our souls. Mozart created The Magic Flute at 6 and was applauded simply due to his extraordinary ability to express on the piano. He didn't have any deep experiences like older individuals, and honestly a robot can compose the same kind of work, without a drop of soul to be found. However, humans can assign experiences, emotion and soul to that expression, interpreting it using their own "Art". Mozart composed his Cow Piss because he had to pay the bills, and while it is still spectacular expression simply because Mozart was so gifted even if he didn't feel much for it, we can assign our own interpretation and connect. So what is so special about people who put in so much hard work into their art? Why would we go to a concert witnessing a dedicated musician if expression can come to anyone and we can interpret any expression training or not? The answer is that we not only connect with the art created, but with the art inside the artist. I find it difficult to believe that anyone can spend so much work perfecting his/her expressive technique over years and years and not become emotionally invested. The dedication, or history, or the meaning the artist was trying to express are what we connect with as we reflect on our own long hours at the chalkboard or behind the keyboard and mouse. One does not simply listen to an accurate technical expression without finding some meaning to it. Even little Mozart had the Light of Christ and we can connect emotionally to that when it comes down to it. It is the nature of humans and it is the reason anyone would spend so much money to experience art. In conclusion, Expression (technique a functional part of which,) is simply the medium in which we connect to the art and/or the artist. The art is the meaning we, the artist or both apply to the expression, and also the accompanying emotion that comes with being a human. If a robot expresses it's music and we connect, the art comes from us, the consumers. (Until we get sentient AI...) NeuroTypical 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted August 29, 2017 Report Share Posted August 29, 2017 This is anatess now. I just read what my son wrote, That made me go hmmmm. I have to read it again to understand what he just said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeuroTypical Posted August 29, 2017 Report Share Posted August 29, 2017 MrShorty and zil 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
askandanswer Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 Perhaps pornography, like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted August 31, 2017 Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 5 hours ago, askandanswer said: Perhaps pornography, like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder? Not quite. Pornography is in the eyes of the artist as well as the beholder. Let me illustrate: 1.) The artist creates an art for the intention of sexual arousal. This art is pornographic regardless of whether the beholder is aroused or not. 2.) The artist creates an art that is not intended for sexual arousal. This art is pornographic only to the beholders who are aroused by it. Make sense? askandanswer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.