What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 49552 times.

thunderbrick

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 5449
  • I'm just not right!
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #80 on: 4 Sep 2014, 01:30 am »
The concept of art assumes that it must be a noble, relevant and difficult creation for the common person, being the work of an unusual person, the artist.

If everyone is able to do, its not art but something else.


And..............that is written where?   :scratch:

RDavidson

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 2872
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #81 on: 4 Sep 2014, 01:38 am »
+1 That is probably the worst "definition" of art I've ever read.

I'm pretty positive that the concept of art isn't bound by anything but human imagination and the artist's ability to act upon or create from their imagination.

thunderbrick

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 5449
  • I'm just not right!
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #82 on: 4 Sep 2014, 01:44 am »
+1 That is probably the worst "definition" of art I've ever read

Yep.  And where does one get the idea that DK is "forced" to pose for pix like the one in question?   :duh:

Diamond Dog

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2219
  • Chameleon, Comedian, Corinthian and Caricature
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #83 on: 4 Sep 2014, 01:54 am »
Yep.  And where does one get the idea that DK is "forced" to pose for pix like the one in question?   :duh:

" They drove a dump truck full of money up to my house...I'm not made of stone! "




D.D.

fredgarvin

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1337
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #84 on: 4 Sep 2014, 01:56 am »
Your doctor can help you if you suffer from low 'T'.  :thumb:

I think she looks great.

RDavidson

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 2872
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #85 on: 4 Sep 2014, 01:58 am »
What I think is funny is how sooo many of the dudes on here think that men rely on talent, not looks or sexiness, to make it in the music business. Why the hell do you think groupies exist? There's sex appeal there, obviously, though what women find sexy and what men find sexy are quite different. So the whole idea that women HAVE to be sexy looking to be successful in the music industry is ignorant. I'm pretty positive Justin Bieber wasn't very talented, but grown women would've jumped his pimpled teenage bones in a heartbeat. On the flip side, look at Adele. She's pretty, but not sexy (by current standards) per se, yet quite talented and quite successful.

rajacat

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3238
  • Washington State
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #86 on: 4 Sep 2014, 03:32 am »
Would you like a taste of whipped cream? :green:


thunderbrick

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 5449
  • I'm just not right!
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #87 on: 4 Sep 2014, 03:36 am »
Now THAT's a classic!   :lol:

Do you believe that woman turned 70 a few years back?   :o

MaxCast

Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #88 on: 4 Sep 2014, 10:56 am »
Ok, off the subject a bit but, what if someone, say a friend, wanted to listen to a Herb Alpert album which is his "best."
I hear they are easy to find in the 10 cents bins.  This could be because they made billions of them or...no one wants them.
just asking...for a friend.  I'm sure some of your friends have a favorite...  :icon_lol:

Russell Dawkins

Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #89 on: 5 Sep 2014, 03:59 am »
To me what comes first to mind when I think of Herb Alpert is "Taste of Honey", and that is on the album three posts up which my father had.  I can't say it's his best but it is enjoyable, if a little formulaic as he tended to be.
Seems to me there was more of a tendency at the time for musicians to "have a sound" which they stuck to. Another of the time was Bert Kaempfert with his light big band and twangy bass.

Chazro

Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #90 on: 5 Sep 2014, 09:49 am »
It just occurred to me that even though I'm a big fan of Herb Alpert's music and own a bunch of his records (he just won a Grammy last year for 'Steppin' Out', very good record!), I don't own a single Tijuana Brass record!

FullRangeMan

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 20900
  • To whom more was given more will be required.
    • Never go to a psychiatrist, adopt a straycat or dog. On the street they live only two years average.
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #91 on: 5 Sep 2014, 09:35 pm »
And..............that is written where?   :scratch:
Unfortunately its not carved in stone(in the minds of people) for this low music is a success.

themadmilkman

Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #92 on: 5 Sep 2014, 09:38 pm »
Unfortunately its not carved in stone(in the minds of people) for this low music is a success.

Out of sheer morbid curiosity, what are some works, be they sculpture, paintings, architecture, or music, that you would consider "art?"  And, in contrast, what are some works in those areas that you would not consider "art?"

FullRangeMan

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 20900
  • To whom more was given more will be required.
    • Never go to a psychiatrist, adopt a straycat or dog. On the street they live only two years average.
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #93 on: 5 Sep 2014, 10:14 pm »
Out of sheer morbid curiosity, what are some works, be they sculpture, paintings, architecture, or music, that you would consider "art?"  And, in contrast, what are some works in those areas that you would not consider "art?"
Would rotten vegetables and dead animals consider art?
http://www.designtavern.com/2009/05/the-beauty-of-rotting-fruit-and-a-taxidermied-crow/
Some years ago came to my city an installation of rotting fish that occupied an entire room.
Of course the smell was brutal.

rajacat

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3238
  • Washington State
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #94 on: 5 Sep 2014, 10:26 pm »
Frankly, I prefer that to the Earth Room in NYC.



The Earth Room is a 22-inch-deep layer of dirt spread across a 3,600-square-foot gallery space in the middle of Soho.
Created by American artist Walter De Maria in 1977, it has been a peaceful, quiet sanctuary from the bustle of the street below for three decades, where the mix of smells from the streets of New York are reduced to only one: the rich smell of soil. While there were originally two additional Earth Rooms, both in Germany, this is the last one remaining.
To keep the Earth Room in good shape, curators must regularly water the dirt. Occasional mushrooms have been found sprouting in the 280,000 pounds of dirt. Though it would be a difficult piece to transport and reinstall elsewhere, it is estimated to be worth at least a million dollars. The space itself, in Manhattan's trendy SoHo neighborhood, is probably worth much more.

themadmilkman

Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #95 on: 7 Sep 2014, 05:38 am »
Would rotten vegetables and dead animals consider art?
http://www.designtavern.com/2009/05/the-beauty-of-rotting-fruit-and-a-taxidermied-crow/
Some years ago came to my city an installation of rotting fish that occupied an entire room.
Of course the smell was brutal.

You're deflecting my question.

But yes, I would consider it to be art.  Art doesn't have to be pleasant.  It often isn't.

But let's go back to your definition:

Quote
The concept of art assumes that it must be a noble, relevant and difficult creation for the common person, being the work of an unusual person, the artist.

Is Magritte's "The Treachery of Images" [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Treachery_of_Images ] noble, relevant and difficult?  Hardly.  What about Andy Warhol's "Campbell's Soup Cans?"

But both works are most certainly art.

I like this definition more, from a straight Google search:

Art: the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

FullRangeMan

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 20900
  • To whom more was given more will be required.
    • Never go to a psychiatrist, adopt a straycat or dog. On the street they live only two years average.
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #96 on: 7 Sep 2014, 10:28 pm »
Art doesn't have to be pleasant.  It often isn't.

Art: the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
Art not need be genial, but it should be enjoyable, beautiful or nice.
Whats people do with unpleasant things?
Put in the trash, except if its a expensive art work, in this case it seat in a huge museum and nobody want buy it.

One of most overrated paintings are Guernica, completly ugly, few artists are free of painting a crap, not many have the talent of Rafael, Rubens or Caravaggio.

Emotional power are not a reliable standard for art, any visit to a morgue or penitentiary has lots of emotional power.
The only reliable standard for art is beauty, but I suspect you will no agree.
« Last Edit: 8 Sep 2014, 12:00 am by FullRangeMan »

FullRangeMan

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 20900
  • To whom more was given more will be required.
    • Never go to a psychiatrist, adopt a straycat or dog. On the street they live only two years average.
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #97 on: 7 Sep 2014, 10:38 pm »
Frankly, I prefer that to the Earth Room in NYC.

I do not know how defend the status of art of works like this.
I cant identify what is art here, the room? the soil? the smell of soil? the worms? the event in the museum? the artist? the artist fame?

If this soil work from 1977 is art where is it now??

Trismos

Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #98 on: 8 Sep 2014, 01:12 am »
Art is subjective.

FIFY

Rob Babcock

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 9319
Re: What's with Diana Krall? And does she still have to do this?
« Reply #99 on: 8 Sep 2014, 06:04 am »
Wow, talk about thread drift! :lol:  The news has made me think even more about this issue.  Has anyone followed the iCloud naked selfie scandal?  Several well known actresses had their photos stolen during a hack of Apple's cloud storage (via well known and very old security holes that Apple neglected to address  :nono:).  In the aftermath reactions are all over the map!  Lena Dunham replied that if you don't want naked pictures leaked then don't take them in the first place.  This elicited a firestorm of criticism from feminist journalists and bloggers.  To me the takeaway is that you really can't trust the security of any device or service that's linked to any kind network but that's not the central issue.  It comes down to objectification of women and how sex roles are assigned in our society.  I don't have an answer for anyone but myself so in this case I will refrain from comment.  But it does come 'round full circle to stuff like this.

I think DK is pretty foxy, and not just for her age.  Is that cool to say nowadays or is acknowledging her attractiveness harassment/objectification?  Does it matter if she's in lingerie?  Does it change the equation if she's using her sex appeal to sell records?