?

Log in

No account? Create an account
click opera
February 2010
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
 
 
 
 
 
 
Mon, Apr. 27th, 2009 01:11 pm
Lies, damned lies, and Darwin tours

29CommentReplyFlag


(Anonymous)
Mon, Apr. 27th, 2009 09:45 pm (UTC)

I think the boundary is a construct, along with the term 'comedian' and 'artist'; ways of categorizing experience. It is worth, once in a while, questioning these terms, if for no other reason than to avoid becoming mindless to their use. They can, after all, significantly affect the way we view our world.

Comedians can also stimulate our imagination (i'm thinking Vic & Bob again), show us ways of living, of interacting; they can politicize us (Charlie Brooker, and his thinly veiled rants); amongst other things.

It excites me when these boundaries (which mother Earth didn't place there for us) become blurred, especially when it comes to comedy and art.

By the way, which Picasso? And under what circumstances?


ReplyThread Parent

(Anonymous)
Mon, Apr. 27th, 2009 11:45 pm (UTC)

All experience is categorized that is human nature. Otherwise we venture into madness. I think rather than worrying about it we should except the terms for what they are and enjoy the "comedy" or 'Art" for what it is without tedious distractions. It's only life after all. I can honestly say I've never seen any blurred boundary between a piece of Art that could be comedy or vice versa. Comedy can achieve all the things you mention I don't dispute that but it's eventual aim is to make you laugh.

Any Picasso, we're never likely to see one outside a gallery environment unless you have very rich friends, I don't.


ReplyThread Parent

(Anonymous)
Tue, Apr. 28th, 2009 10:03 am (UTC)

And what if making you laugh is the secondary aim? What if the comedian himself isn't aware of his real 'aim'?


ReplyThread Parent