i feel like there’s better counter claims that you could’ve responded to, specifically on ur method of finding the best art. Usually websites like rym compile the “pinnacle” of genres which means that you wouldn’t really understand why they are a pinnacle unless you had more knowledge about its surrounding albums. For example, A Love Supreme, if someone previously uninterested in jazz jumps into that as their first introduction they are not going to pick up on what makes the album stand out in the world of jazz. Then, instead of exploring and refining your understanding of jazz, you would just jump to the next rym-core album and repeat the cycle. As a result, your experience of deep albums would be shallow and feel uneventful. I think there’s also more to be said about listener’s fatigue and the tastes of people who curate our art canons too. Overall nice video though, love ur content
That's an excellent point. A lot of what is considered "important" work is "important" in the first place because it stood out in the genre, so it might not be the best introduction for someone unfamiliar with the space. A better method might be getting more specific with people's breakdown of "the best". So instead of just jumping between rym-core albums from completely different genres, you decide to have a "jazz kick" for a few months, exploring albums from cool jazz, hard bop, jazz fusion, acid jazz, etc.
@@duncanclarke yeah man that’s basically how i go about consuming art, gives me space to soak in an artist’s context and better understand what they’re trying to convey.
I have friends who "enjoy things" and consider stuff "pretty good" not because they consume and don't ask questions, they just consume what they enjoy and are open to friends showing them stuff they otherwise wouldn't have cared to look at because they think consuming anything can be enriching in some capacity because they love art that much. For a while I thought "pretty good" was a level lower than good but really it's just another way of saying "good". They just don't get up and arms about the importance of art and classical stuff because they don't take everything so damn seriously, they wanna enjoy the 4,000 weeks they have left in this world after all.
"bad" art also has it's reasons to be read/listened/etc tho. When for example reading a "bad" story one can end up thinking of ways where it can be improved and maybe as an exercicse write one's own improved version which can become valuable lesson in creating art
I agree, and have had very productive experiences with this method myself, _but_ what you're referring to here is a matter of technical quality (the level of craft the artist has put into the work) and personal taste. (What kind of stuff you, personally, like seeing in a story.) That is to say, you look at a work you didn't like and use that to figure out exactly what you _do_ like. This can be plain good writing, particular tropes, plot devices, characterization, etc. Presumably, you still want to write a story _like_ that, just better. What Duncan here is talking about is inherent artistic value, specifically defined as the work providing a sort of "life-enriching" effect via particularly profound emotional or psychological experiences. (He doesn't specifically say the "profound" part but it's implied.) So, he's not saying that Shakespeare is better than the MCU because the MCU is poorly written, but because the latter isn't "deep" enough, I guess? For comparison, this would be like reading a Spider-Man comic book and trying to figure out why it _isn't_ Kafka's The Metamorphosis.
@@duncanclarkeJust wanted to say I recently stumbled upon your channel (via the algorithm pushed Linguistics Iceberg). Enjoying your channel very much so far, will continue to binge. Also I agree with your video and am happy to have finally found someone who put into words my personal tussle with the ideas of the video. To add a little bit in re people who say "what makes classics inherently more valuable." Time can be pretty effective at filtering out the less valuable. If it still holds relevance years and years later, there's a stronger possibility that it's worth paying some attention to. From Norwegian Wood by Haruki Murakmai: [...] he made it a rule never to touch a book by any author who had not been dead at least 30 years. "That's the only kind of book I can trust", he said. "It's not that I don't believe in contemporary literature," he added, "but I don't want to waste valuable time reading any book that has not had the baptism of time. Life is too short."
My problem with this is that a canon is made up from the collective perspective of a bunch of self fashioned intellectual elitists who get to determine what are and aren't so called objectively good works that we should all read. It's almost like in their infinite wisdom they forget what the word subjectivity means. People can derive personal improvement, a deep understanding of the world around them, AND joy from a variety of works that fall outside of "the literary canon". They also tend to be older works that don't always carry modern contexts and diverse perspectives. As an English teacher, I hope we can just piss away this entire concept soon and allow for people to actually learn which means speaking to students in ways that they can contextualize with their lives experiences.
fully agree. while these works might be important to be aware of- like with my history in fine art looking at the renaissance and the western art cannon- it doesn't mean these will actually sing to me at all. I haven't found much meaning at all in old Christian artworks commissioned by patrons, dickens doesn't mean much to me and a lot of the most popular music isn't my type either. but I have found incredibly strong inspiration from serial experiment lain, or from artists I follow online showing the depths of their souls through their illustrative works and from all-around artists like melanie martinez and her raw creativity, metaphor and spirituality.-- all medias and artists that I'm certain a bunch people in this group would turn their noses up at. Also, art changes its meaning as it is preserved- japanese fanart of popular street actors from centuries ago is now considered fine art and in museums- the opposite can happen, to most people shakespeare is now just annoying highschool work. I understand OP is saying we need to find things that are good rather than just content slop, and that its important to look at "classic art" and i agree. But why is it MORE important to focus on these pieces of the western canon when it wouldn't give any insight to someone? not everyone will find meaning in the same books, movies, music and art for the rest of time- especially when they do not speak to majority of the human experience. just listening, reading, consuming this content for the sake of "being enlightened (lol)" it could be just as useless to me as watching sludge-content tiktoks.
@@locomore1390 I also agree. The most important thing about art in any form is that it has an impact on the one who experiences it. And a lot of old works can be still fascinating, especially if they were "the first of their kind" in something. But they are not the holy grail for all time - because more art is created everyday by independent artists who live out their dream, their emotions, their passion. Those artists might not have the audience of the "old classics" - because let's face it: As long as some snobs tell everybody that those old books / artworks / etc. are the holy grail, they will get audiences. But what about a person who crafts his / her own world, tells stories in it with good written characters and puts all his / her effort into this art just because it feels right to do so? Why is this not as "worthy" as one of the old classics? Maybe exactly this unknown story resonates with somebody who finds it "by accident" and it inspires the one who finds it deeply. The same with music - you can tell me about the "best songs of all time" and I probably won't like them, because it is not my "frequency of music". Not all people are the same. We like different things, we are different. There are great (old) classics out there worth your time, but it is in a way disrespectful to new art that doesn't get that much audience by nature but might be exactly the thing for you.
I don't quite agree. I think that art is objective, and that by reading/watching/listening to whatever we want is not a good idea. I listen to The Beatles (probably the greatest band of all time) and I am connected with so many people because of that. Because their music is so good it transcends time. SIXTY years later their music is still beloved and constantly listened to. That has to mean something. There are a lot of very popular artists out there who have some pretty good music, but that artist will die out and lose popularity. Some music will never die because it is the greatest of all time. Would you rather listen to music that is the greatest ever made and will connect you with generations to come or music that is popular now but will die later?
My problem with this approach is I often find that people have a tendency to just parrot ideas to make themselves sound smart or because they don't take anything of real value from the media they interact with and want to make it seem like they do. This leads to another problem of not encouraging people to voice there differing interpretations for works of art and labeling the people who do as "haters" or "contrarians". You should be able to point out why you don't like aspects of or find faults with universally agreed upon classics but often when you bring up something like Goodfellas or Berserk you're just gonna hear the same talking points repeated at nauseum.
I agree. A great example is Elfen Lied. It's a powerful, beautiful, and deeply philosophical anime, far greater than that of Evangelion. And at one pointing in ratings, it was considered and ranked as such. But a few people who "didnt get it" made some popular articles about how its bad, and now everyone repeats over and over again the same easily debunked and intellectually dishonest talking points to tell you how bad it is and how stupid you are if you say you liked Elfen Lied and how deep and powerful it was. It's annoying, irritating, and deliberately following a herd mentality where objectivity is thrown out the window.
I recently saw ghost in the shell and akira which are considered masterpieces and was greatly disappointed. I decided to watch them after watching jin roh which i randomly found on youtube and knew nothing about and was blown away by it. I feel like people have a tendency to call cryptic and hard to understand or just nonsensical things masterpieces because it makes them seem smart or something. A masterpiece has to excel at multiple things and not just be a bunch philosophical impossible to answer questions. I can only confidently call one piece of art a masterpiece and it's Dark Souls 1.
I think the problem with this is that what becomes "some of the greatest of all time" is a problem of those media needing to have existed for long enough to build that presteige. The thing is is that a lot of those things we hold as the best of the best were far from well loved in their time, for example, Van Gogh is a very good example of this. Even the Mona Lisa, the most painting painting of all time, is another case of this.
The Beatles and Amy Winehouse have brought a lot of value to my life. The same goes for reading works of Nietzsche, Khant, Hagel among other philosophers, studying history, economics, geopolitics, quantum mechanics and so on. However, for some reason, three main things brought the most value to my life 1) The Beatles 2) Amy Winehouse 3) Elder Scrolls Franchise. Maybe I can't fully explain it, but these all shaped me, gave me profound insight and feelings. As well as near endless pleasure, that only really ends because I will one day😅
Hard disagree. The most you can get out of any art is to engage it on its own terms to start. Learning and viewing art through other lenses is a useful skill but will always fall flat when it comes to actually understanding what you're engaging with. This means engaging with "bad art" honestly and with intent to understand ON ITS OWN TERMS. You dont **need** an understanding of the classics to do this. Also most "classics" reinforce the cultural hegemony in a way that is counter-productive to understanding art as a whole.
Still, that doesn't contradict the fact that some works will have more of an impact than you than others. I'm interested in hearing about the cultural hegemony you mentioned. Wouldn't that only apply if you only read classics from one specific place and time?
The problem I had by consuming only The Best is that I made a norm of what is exceptional, making it feel mundane, and stale. It also makes it harder to apreciate why a work is good due to both, a lack of perspective, and by not rating things by myself, relying that instead to the Lists of The Best.
You don't have to just read into 'the best' literature ever, most of these masterpieces are moreso gateways into specific genres or styles of writing. For example, if you want to get into fantasy, the best person to start with is J.R.R. Tolkien, but that doesn't mean you have to stop there. Use these works as compasses for your own tastes and what you might consume next.
I think about this a lot. I often feel excluded because I tend not to like pop culture things. Consuming high value content surely provides me more satisfaction but I also feel like I’m missing something like references or shared experiences
One of the hardest things to do is finding people who share the same interests as you. That’s why “mainstream” NPCs have an easier time making friends. Luckily we have the internet to connect us with like-minded individuals, only problem is the internet can’t simulate real friendships.
@@jokerpilled2535 This honestly, 99% of people I meet in life are boring and mundane, the majority of people I actually find appealing to talk to are on random chatrooms speaking miles away from where I live.
The video's content does not match up with the title. The title says we shouldn't let people enjoy things, but the video just says that you should try consuming a variety of content.
Here’s the problem, sure, low level product or art is clearly lesser, and we likely shouldn’t consume too much of it, that being said, who is to say what true art is moving-or-has a higher level of improving your life, psychological or whatever. You can say Scorsese is one of the greatest living directors, while I often think his work is drole compared to the likes of Tarkovsky, and you may think conversely to me, and that’s fine. Who’s to say something like a hidden novel written by a lesser known polish fellow is less enriching than something like The Sun also Rises which I found to be incredibly dry (even if it was purposeful, sure) and souless? Everyone has cultivated different taste and to make a hit piece on “modern art” at large is silly at best and turning a blind eye at worst
The goal of this video wasn't to make a hit piece on modern art, marvel movies, or popular music. I tried to communicate how no individual can find a criterion for what constitutes "moving" or "important" art. The best we can do is rely on intersubjective strategies like lists, critics, recommendations, retrospectives, and so on. Some of that art might not resonate with us, but there's a higher chance that if it does, it will be more profound and penetrating than if we just selected things at random. Everyone has their own taste, but everyone also has the opportunity to broaden their taste by exploring media that people consider classic.
@@duncanclarke I understand the thought process, I think more time could’ve been spent on the other reasons you’ve listed in this comment here rather than purely popular opinion, or 1 critic in particular, but I understand different limitations on different videos, you usually provide very solid content, just wanted to put my opinion out there since this one seemed definitely a little more targeted than usual
It's important to point out that any website or collective of people will have their own biases as to what is the greatest art ever, such is the case with IMDb and RYM as you mentioned. And you'll see organizations stan particular artists or auteurs and shit on other ones when the ones dismissed are sometimes for petty reasons. So it's important to get a wide view of all artists out there and trying not to judge a book by its cover. Ultimately, I think it's best to go by artist rather than art. For example, instead of starting with Madvilliany, start with Operation Doomsday. Instead of starting with No Country, start with Blood Simple. For me, understanding their history and impact with the world today can feel like reliving those eras around those people. And ultimately, no matter how much art you consume, in my eyes, there may never be a "greatest" of all time. Never being a greatest artist, album, movie, etc; because then all art to come before and after that piece in that category will have to compare to that singular piece. Also you forgot to mention games, because tabletop and video games especially can be artistic. I think it's absolutely essential for future generations to experience artistic greats for themselves and to bring themselves out of the new for part of their artistic diet. Hell, I have a friend who is a deep fan of today's Hollywood mainstream of superheroes and stan-ing actors, but also loves cryptic and vague horror. Here's hoping Jordan Peele will be their gateway drug.
I get the point about working through discographies/filmographies chronologically, but unless you're already planning on experiencing the entire oeuvre, that might not be the best method. For example, I might watch Hard Eight and think "that was pretty good, but nothing spectacular" and then give up on Paul Thomas Anderson. But if I start with The Master and think "wow this guy is an absolute genius" I might go back to revisit Hard Eight and get a lot more out of it. I agree entirely with all the other points you made.
I agree with a lot of your takes in this, however I find it hard to find reliable sources of classics for works outside the Western focus (like works from art revolutions of Asia or Africa) and considering how Eurocentric the English speaking view is (obviously) it’s hard to rely on what’s popular to find works that would expand my view of the human experience in non Indo-European languages. Additionally it would be foolish to say that there isn’t any or that many works that would be considered masterpieces from places outside Europe. I’m not trying to pick a fight, I’m just wondering about the lack of focus outside of European works, whether that’s just due to the problems with translation or otherwise.
this!! i’m arab and whenever i see takes about art and literature from a western perspective i just chuckle cause their world view is so limited to what they grew up with..
There’s already tons and tons of stuff to see and experience from western media. I think it’s a time and interest thing. I sometimes try to play Happy End or 9mm Parabellum Bullet for my dad and he can’t stand it. He hates that he doesn’t like that he doesn’t understand what’s he’s saying. The farthest he’ll go is maybe Santana speaking Spanish. Take for instance the Japanese Novel series, Monogatari, it is largely considered untranslatable due to the kanji used having multiple meanings for the use of puns and story elements.I don’t see it as a negative to focus solely on western stuff since theirs only so much to do and there’s some common ground, the problem is that most people are just dismissive to Asian culture as a whole.
@@theoutsiderprodnot really, 1st world countries are extremely limited in their world view as they aren't in need of learning from others or cooperating with them as much as 2nd or 3rd world countries do, growing up in there would make it mandatory to learn about the world and at the very least your neighbors. A north African for example would need to know 3 languages to even be competitive in the job market, and to learn those he has to be exposed to their cultures, thus granting him a wider understanding of how they see the world, their issues, society, history and culture.. Meanwhile someone in a 1st world country will read in his native tongue and maybe a 2nd language (supposing he doesn't live in a multilingual area), he will be only engaging with western productions and western history, this severely limits how he sees and understands the world to how everyone before him did.
Inevitably, watching RU-vid long enough will provide the perfect balance of both modern day slop as well as classical slop. That being said, calling something "The very best" is subjective because I've read and been forced to do literary analysis of Shakespeare work, Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, Othello and thought the story was convoluted and boring, the characters static and uninteresting, and while the prose was well put together, the ending to all the stories were very unsatisfying and unmoving. Meanwhile modern animes with simplistic action sequences leave a deeper and more profound effect on me like dbz and baki since the message is far easier to digest lmao.
"The Very Best" upholds an impossible standard. It just gives you this idea that it will be an amazing experience for you, no matter who you are. That philosophy isn’t very useful to recommend someone a piece of work.
Another sensational one! it makes me happy that you produce this content, your editing and the theme of the video go together so well and it really makes me finish watching thinking about what to do with the rest of my time. Congrats!
Altough your videos aren't in-depth, they are a splendid balance between learning/contemplation and entertainment. Much more thought-provoking than shortsscrolling.
It's reasonable to do everything you say to *start* developing a taste of your own, but it's also as important to let go of IMDB, RYM for your own opinions and explore on your own what you're interested in. There are no eastern authors on that list for example. Explore cultures and genres and find what you like on your own. That hivemind mentality of liking what's already popular can only satisfy you so much into your journey of art discovery
I don't gatekeep, I proselytize. I go out and spread the word of the thing i like. You are welcome to say "I'm good" or "tell me more." And I'll say, check out that gate over yonder. It already filters people out, but they're turning me away rather than me turning them away.
I personally think that what is good or bad is from the perspective of the consumer I have so many video games or movies that I like even though they are objectively seen as bad I still enjoy them because they just hit the spot for me I think that every one should consume whatever they want no matter if it is seen as bad or good by the wide majority of people because we don't know what the person feels while consuming media this is the reason why I don't care if the media they consume is objectively good or not I care about the feeling and memories the person connect with that content
This assumes people like those classics because they're good and not because it's a signal of social status. If everyone did it, you could no longer feel superior to other people. And you wouldn't want that, would you? In any case, you might as well say why deal with art in any way? Wouldn't the opertunity cost of watching a fake story detract from learning about the real world? Isn't that far more uplifting than fake people crying about fake problems? Why learn about Shakespeare at all when most of us don't understand Newton all that well?
They are not fake at all. They mirror the human experince. How are the feelings doubt, loneliness, love, etc fake? Art is based on real life. They are very much real. That is why art is important. It can speak to you in a very profound way. But more importanly you learn more about. yourself and the world around you .
But can't a mediocre or even bad piece inspire or move somone, whilst a so called eye opening classic bores them. Me and my brother really enjoyed the Star Wars sequel trilogy whilst I thought Andor was okay.
An interesting point, to be sure. Nevertheless, I wonder about the validity of such thinking. The argument that life is short and should be spent diving into the best art possible, is valid. However, the same argument can also be used to sustain the opposite view, i.e. that life should be spent enjoying whatever brings you the most dopamine. Exclusively consuming media that 'enhances' your life, eventually leads to your death as well, and arguably, you wouldn't have enjoyed to the fullest. Of course, whatever 'enjoying to fullest' means is entirely subjective, and certainly not only tied to the consumption of media, although nowadays that does form a large part of it. I listen to classical music, but I would never dare claim that my time is better spent doing that than by listening to pop, jazz, rock or by doing anything else. It doesn't provide a huge amount of entertainment, not when compared to scrolling around on the internet. There certainly are emotions to be explored, but I rarely become so engrossed in the music that I feel much 'enriched' afterwards. One could make the claim that this is a 'me' problem, but by doing so one admits that 'high' art is, after all, subjective, thus proving that consuming such art isn't a good idea for everyone.
Oh man. I've been this rabbithole for years when it comes to music. I always strive towards finding that piece of work that enhances my musicial knowledge and taste, but I always end up spending too much time considering what album I should listen because there simply is so much to choose from. Instead I spend time on online forums asking questions to gather info about what album or music I just might be looking for. When you start listening it is easy to expand your knowledge and taste because you haven't listened to the classics yet, but after a while you'll just keep on looking and looking for the next piece in your puzzle. This video sums that up perfectly.
Considering my usual revulsion to this mindset, I'm impressed at how you were able to make a case for it. I'm not fully sold, primarily because I've lost track of how many classic works of art were hated in their time only to be reevaluated later, but I've been getting much more open to and interested in exploring "the greats" recently, so there's that.
I'm older, and I'm here to say that I dislike, even hate, a lot of media. The older I get, the more media--whether lauded or not--I reject. It's not intentional. I see old patterns repeating, becoming dull. I read Plato and Descartes, watched The Godfather and Yojimbo, listened to The Velvet Underground and so on. It didn't make me happier, more enriched, or moral. If I could trade all that time for something right now, I'd trade it for time with loved ones and seeing the world. Being present. Enjoying just having the time to use in a way that wasn't just about my self.
For those reading, ignore the bullsh!t in the video. Stick to the middle ground between mainstream and elite and think for yourself people, you don't need a corprate machine or a bunch of socially oblivious hipster NPCs telling you how to live, pick the best of both sides of your liking and own it!
There are so many assumptions in this that make sense, including the glaring one that anyone can determine what a work that will resonate deeply with them is before they read it. Many people read "the classics" and are bored to tears, which is hardly a recipe for emotional self-discovery. Meanwhile, they may find epiphanies in YA. Beyond this, this perspective ignores the social aspect of art, and promotes a solipsistic approach to art appreciation that cares nothing for being able to discuss popular art with friends (including conversations that bash the art). I would argue that an enthusiastic conversation with a friend about why a marvel movie is bad is more likely to strike upon a thought that reveals something interesting about what makes art good for the people in the conversation than is a slog through Chaucer. Something being hard to access doesn't mean that it will be good once you make the effort, and especially the literary cannon has been determined by aristocrats and politics for centuries. The weak form of this video is ultimately fine I guess, but the strong form of this argument feels pretty shortsighted.
Omg, this video actually IS life - changing for me in a certain way. You talk about some topics from a very specific point of view, which casually is so relatable to me. And why is this life-changing? it could be just a simple coincidence. I can give you that. But just by the fact that these specific thoughts on art are so SO present in my daily life, that is what amazes me the most. It is actually kind of weird to find someone who thinks in such a similar way like you. Thanks for the video, keep It up!! You dont always know if someone could be inspired by what you do Take care!❤️ (sorry for my english, not my first language)
Combatting one form of conformity with another. I know that is a very cynical assessment of this method of experiencing art in the most effective way possible for quality vs time. But hear me out. If you only experience art as curated by its ratings, your personal taste will revolve around a big fat “average” of other people’s taste overall. And so while you will objectively experience the most high quality works as according to the general consensus (which by no means is an unreliable metric JUST MAKING THAT CLEAR) you will only be experiencing that art because you were advised to by other people’s opinions. This will largely render the subjectivity of your art appreciation down to art that most other people appreciate. This is now where my opinion is inserted. Art can and should be appreciated at an individual level for reasons that are meaningful to you in particular. This will actually sometimes mean you will find personal enjoyment in art that goes against the grain of what other people will consider high quality. You may not always be spending your time “enriching” yourself with maximum efficiency, but you will experience a very dynamic and broad palette that will enrich you to deeper depths than accepting the status quo of what makes art “good.” There are many works of art that are currently broadly accepted as one of the best that were largely unpopular or unrecognized in their day. With the vast amount of information being created each day, you can and will find things that will enrich your life that are not and never will be popular. But having experienced that art, you would have still been enriched. In this day and age where people are keen on efficiency, sometimes we “throw the baby out with the bath water.”
I've always struggled to read books that aren't adventure or philosophy related. I think getting out to create new memorable experiences is more fulfilling than reading. I guess some people prefer sitting and reading War And Peace. But I prefer to Ski, Mountain Bike, hike etc..
Man, even before watching this i knew that there was plenty of classic media that I've been missing out on. I even had a list of the best albums, movies, shows and books i wanted to check out but never really got a chance to. But after watching this + your "how much time do we really have?" video, i realized that if I don't get started quickly, I will die before the witnessing the greatest pieces of art in human history. Thanks Duncan 👍
When that guy told me to read Jane austin I’m like no thanks. I’ll continue to watch the worst kaju movies ever made and be fulfilled in those moments instead of hate existing
I agree with you in most of the video, that we should read, watch and listen to classics, but I have two provocations to make. First, that "art today is being made only for consumption", and yes, it is being made for consumption, there is no art without patrons. The works that we call classics also served a purpose, including a political one and this will always happen, we cannot analyze art from an idealistic perspective, art, like all things, is inserted in a historical time that has its own particularities. The second tease would be, isn't it as bad as just watching mediocre fun movies that are being made today (like the Marvel movies) and just consuming and thinking about classic westerns? Like, the western is so young if we think about it, how many incredible works do we have in Asia and Africa for example? What about works from socialist countries that had a completely different way of seeing the world? I hope you can understand me well, my English is not so good, I'm from Brazil.
Excellent points. All art is made for consumption, but some art also actively tries to do the things I described in this video (move you, enhance your life, etc.) Art will always be historically contingent, but truly great art transcends its circumstances to communicate something about life and the human experience, which makes it timeless. I also agree entirely with the unfortunate western emphasis in this video. There are countless films, books, and albums from non-western cultures that would meet this definiton of classic. Even if the historical and cultural circumstances are different, they are still gesturing towards those enduring themes, just from a different perspective.
I like dedicating time to listen some good albums, both classics and new things i don't usually listen. I ended up discovering some really good things. Finding new music is always an incredible activity to do.
Love the video and I really resonated with it, though I tend to take this philosophy a bit further on the personal end. I don't even rely on lists and I rarely follow up on other's suggestions after reading the summary. For movies, shows, and books I check the synopses and judge if I really will get something out of it or if it is worth getting into. For music I just leave it up to chance, because I play on repeat anyway and by the time I get bored I usually have found new genres that I want to explore. I feel that if I spend too much time on other's suggestions, I'll never have time to explore my own interests. I have my own lists, be it a thought-provoking documentary on the human condition or a kawaii-bass cringe anime song. Because everything is meaningless in the grand scale, I'll define meaning on my own. Optimistic Nihilism FTW. Though admittedly it has led to me feeling out of place often as I am far removed from pop culture, it also makes me quirky and interesting to the people who know me and has led to me forming better relationships with people who genuinely understand me.
Great video! But would really appreciate it if you could include the sources in the video description, would love to access the rest of the interview with Harold Bloom
Nope, I've tried looking at what people consider classics in (blank) community. It didn’t speak to me and that's fine cause stories are meant for so many different reasons.
The last line of the video made me laugh a lot. It happened so fast, ended so soon, and nothing came after it. Basically, it had the same effect on me as those perfectly cut scream videos.
It really annoys me when my roommates and I try to pick a movie to watch, and it ends up being some cookie-cutter Netflix comedy. I know that they haven't seen anything by Scorsese, and it just feels like a waste. Seems harmless but you can feel the opportunity cost.
idk if anyone has already said this but there is a counterargument to this that’s like if there are pieces of media that people just aren’t really talking about and you personally might not really like the most acclaimed stuff when compared to some others which aren’t as well known, I think this applies more to music or art and it sometimes sucks finding them because there can be so much that just isn’t as good and in the case of music you might run into things that look good or generic but don’t really fit their cover, idk just wanted to leave this comment
Recently I saw the movie Jin-Roh and it instantly became my favorite movie, it's more realistic than any other movie i have ever seen and deals with very i teresting themes. But no one knows about it, i found out about it through a random youtube short edit. I ofthen find pieces that are talked about as masterpieces disappointing when i finally experience them because my expectations were too high. Dark Sousl changed my life, i knew nothing about it before playing it except that it's hard.
One other way to get deeper into classics is looking deeper into the genres you enjoy. You like horror? Watch some classic horror movies like Exorcism or read Edgar Allan Poe. Enjoy electronic? Look deeper into the first electronic pieces and realise how many times Popcorn has been sampled. Also for elitists it's great to try and enjoy some modern stuff, there's a lot of great modern movies and music to enjoy, something revolutionary comes out every year.
Your specific use of the Marvel movies as an example of "empty" consumed entertainment is rather unfortunate. One of the things that has mad the MCU so popular is because of the very HUMAN stories that they ultimately tell. Sure, "Iron Man" may have a lot of flying around and blowing stuff up. But Tony Stark's character arc- over the course of the first film, and over the course of the MCU storyline- is exceedingly human, dealing with real-world issues like PTSD, narcissism, family and friend group dynamics, political and personal philosophies, etc. The "WandaVision" TV show may be just a show about comic book characters that can fly and do magic and stuff. But it's also a look into grief, loss, love, letting go, holding on, many very real, heart-felt, deeply human subjects. "Black Panther" and "Wakanda Forever" both look at very very real issues of morality, family, loyalty, etc. with just as much exploration of the human condition as Shakespeare or Dickens. Dismissing the MCU as populist fluff, shallow surface-level entertainment, is to miss the point entirely. Either by a person who has judged them without having seen them at all, or someone who was unwilling to look past their prejudices and actually experience the full depth of what they had to offer. Are there films and TV shows that are shallow entertainment? Yes. Is every film or TV show going to speak to every person? No. But by and large, I feel that among certain people especially, the MCU has become a short-hand for "shallow," when that is the very opposite of true. The MCU has a TREMENDOOUS depth to it, for those willing to see it. As far as the broader idea of using our limited time on Earth to broaden our minds and deepen our understandings: I think that a person can choose to do that, regardless of what media they choose to consume. A deep thinker could, theoretically, find meaning in a newspaper comic strip, or a badly-written 70s cop drama. A shallow person could attempt to read Shakespeare or Kant, but not understanding, give up right away. Those who choose to live life deeply can choose to spend their time imbibing the established classics, as well as the newest releases of film, music, novels, etc. that are meant to speak to the human soul the most. And they could also simply enjoy some light popcorn entertainment from time to time, because that's part of the human experience, as well. -My 2¢
You'll never get your d1c sucked sitting at home watching movies all day everyday that's for sure, unless you are SUPER LUCKY and this hot chick just randomly enters your home and starts going to town...... If you want stuff you gotta work for it is my point.
Im rambling here don’t mind me lol I really like that you showed those albums because I can personally say that music has transformed me into a different person. It allows me to feel a transcendence that I never thought existed. I remember first finding artists in high school like Venetian Snares, Aphex Twin, Autechre, Battles, and Oneohtrix Point Never for the first time and feeling this excitement within my mind, such colorful moods and feelings that were indescribable when I listened. Nevertheless, I still feel guilty sometimes about my tastes because I don’t want to come off as some Pitchfork loser because I like Animal Collective or something. I do understand why these bands are talked about so frequently though. You can feel their ideas and get lost in their world that can leave you at a loss for words
I agree with this, however, it's worth noting that since what kind of content and art would best benefit someone changes according to each individual, there's no guaranteed formula for finding those works, such as looking at the classics.
Respectful hard disagree with the premise of this video, or at least bloom's take. Aristotle preached that no one could have a fully civilized or "human" existence without the specific experience of the oikos (Greek city state or polis society) even while Alexander would make that idea inconceivable within Aristotle's lifetime. Just because a well spoken person makes an appeal to conservative social norms doesn't mean those norms have any more value than behaviors they criticize. Furthermore, we are facing a global legitimacy crisis as our meritocratic institutions lose credibility, including academia. Frankly, the position that we plebs haven't gotten our souls uplifted by Proust as a social negative is laughable, considering that those who read Proust usually find themselves too educated and valuable to do manual labor and so read or teach instead. This clip of bloom embodies the self-validating class of elites who have gotten every world historical moment wrong for the past 40 years.
I get the point about engaging with contemporary art and literature, but I agree with Henry Thoreau who said,of the classics: “Any man will go considerably out of his way to pick up a silver dollar; but here are golden words, which the wisest men of antiquity have uttered, and whose worth the wise of every succeeding age have assured us of; and yet we learn to read only as far as Easy Reading, the primers and classbooks, and when we leave school, the Little Reading, and story books, which are for boys and beginners; and our reading, our conversation and thinking, are all on a very low level, worthy only of pygmies and manikins.”
just a reminder, though, that you can create your own canon through the combination of the ones that already exist. It's possible that there's some classics that you read watch or listen to that for a some reason you don't understand at the time that you experience them or they just doesn't resonate with you at all due to their themes, message or morals and that's fine, but they might be other that do. the best thing to build a equal balance between your preferences and what's generally praised by creating some rules and actual reasons to see beauty in them. I conclusion, pay attention in literature class or just ask for recommendation to your parents, but don't be embarrased to be passionated about what gives you comfort.
"Let people enjoy things" isn't about the people criticised. It's addressed to the people who aim to belittle others for their interests. It reads as "don't be a dick", and I hope you know better than blaming people for being hurt by words specifically designed to hurt them.
First of all, "the works that people agree are the very best" is a deceptively clear direction. You say to seek works this way as opposed to "randomly seeking" or an algorithm and then you go on to cite iMDb and - God forbid - RYM, as examples for this, ignoring that those are just two algorithms. You associate "algorithm" with what comes up on your recommended feed on RU-vid, but both IMDB and RYM use algorithms which weigh the amount of ratings for any given work with much, much higher significance than the average rating they get, leading to films which are already popular being favored and films which are not remaining in obscurity regardless of their quality. Second, even if these algorithms DID provide a more "accurate" account of the works people currently agree are the best, this would be a strictly temporal assessment. In the grand scheme of things music and film are extremely modern forms of art. Albums and films frequently undergo critical reevaluations both for the better and for the worse. Three hundred years from now these "charts" will look absolutely nothing like they do now. We have no idea what the "Western canon" will do with these works. Third, there is no qualitative difference between the Billboard 200 and the Western canon itself as defined by Bloom. While we may seem to be participating in a more academic or sophisticated process engaging with the latter rather than the former, both are equally arbitrary and Bloom is no greater of an authority than Kim Kardashian. He has his taste and she has hers. Of course it is good to seek out art which moves us, so if Shakespeare doesn't move you and a cookbook does, Bloom is no different from a substitute teacher assigning what he is told to assign. Following the canon feeds it, while all of the true greatest works in every medium gradually become lost media to make room for the canon.
@@posthegemony944 I see what you're saying, but I don't think taste is as arbitrary as you are let on. Sure, people are always going to be moved by different things, but there will always be things that have a propensity to move people more profoundly than other things. Shakespeare might not work on some people, but for most it will work much better than a cookbook. The Western canon isn't perfect, and as you said, online media databases have an inclination towards the most popular media. Even marvel movies make multiple appearances in the top 250 lol. Of course, there's no perfect way to discern what art will connect with you you and what art won't, but I believe it's worth making an attempt.
@@duncanclarke I fear that the canon threatens our ability to seek art authentically. There is a colonial undercurrent within it. At what point are we no longer experiencing art but rather historical curiosity? That's my concern.
@@posthegemony944 I definitely echo those concerns. Harold Bloom had some pretty colonial tendencies with his selection and reverence for western culture. In my view, it should be treated as a list of recommendations and places to start, rather than an exhaustive list of what is significant. I think these selection mechanisms (like media databases, the canon, etc) can still be used while experiencing art authentically, but it's also easy to fall into the "born in the wrong generation" trap I discussed, where people fixate on these lists and canons more than the art itself.
@@duncanclarke That's fair. I disagree with a lot of the philosophical claims that are made frivolously in this video (such as the presupposition that there is no objectivity outside the human concept of it) but I think the points made on "consensus" eventually being indistinguishable from the "canon" are worth noting if you're interested. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-tpeCQiSEKjk.html
I legit had to check the upload date because I thought this was an April fools joke. What a series of garbage takes from a channel I so thoroughly enjoy otherwise. Sad.
You had me 'till you suggested that the highest-rated is a good indicator of 'best'. Quality is inversely proportional to popularity. Top-40 songs being the most obvious example.
I've been planning on watching Schindler's List for the first time and putting it off, not because I'm afraid it'll move me, I'm down for my emotions being wretched a bit, but because I'm afraid it won't. I have impaired vision/hearing/audio processing and probably other issues and I've tried watching it before only to just feel like I wasn't tracking things or getting into it. I'm gonna try watching it with audio description next time but I'm like . . . what if I still have trouble getting through it? I feel like it's gonna be like trouble shooting. Re-watching the move up the point I realize I get lost, etc. I have trouble connecting to movies in general. And music, even moreso. There is so much I just don't connect to. And I don't see the value in just trying to see what the hype is all about. I am a picky snob, but don't hold normal standards of what's great to high value. I want something I believe will reasonate with me as an individual. This could be an interesting fan fiction or youtube video essay. It probably won't be a movie or music album of any kind.
I definitely agree with your points in the video. It seems that everything is now more or less products to be consumed, and sadly that's for music and movies as well. Unless we want to experience the greatest and search further based on what we want to see and feel, we won't get satisfaction from these forms of media. On another note, everyone go listen to "In the Court of the Crimson King" , it's phenomenal.
You should explore the very best humanity has to offer but I think in general it's more important for people to run their personal edges and discover new, worthwhile things for themselves. If you have a personal interest in organic chemistry let's say, nothing should stop you from going to the library and cracking open a textbook. If you don't know anything about Native American art history but you find it interesting, then go on the internet and learn. If you heard Tenent was good, watch it. We have all the tools we need to explore the richness of life in a way that's more accessible to the average person than ever before. It's about encouraging others to explore that richness in their own way rather than letting them just blindly float in their own little corner of the media ocean. It's a cross between cultivating good taste and respecting your own intelligence.
I'm genuinely happy shit art exists, it's a great teaching tool to understand the beauty of amazing works and your appreciation for it will grow - while I get as frustrated as the next guy when the newest ubisoft open world title drops, i'll enjoy a masterpiece even more afterwards - this goes for any artform
Whether looking through the highest rated works is better than getting recommendations from an algorithm depends on how good the algorithm is and what it's optimized for. Sadly engagement on social media doesn't correlate very well with soul-moving reflection so their algorithms aren't that, but it is definitely possible to construct a personalized algorithm that does better than the majority opinion.
i agree overall but i dont think its a dichotomy, there is a happy medium, a Hegelian synthesis if u will, between say reading the myth of sisyphus and rewatching the hunger games w friends
I agree with you on this, but I have to add that picking the art you choose to appreciate depends a lot on where you are. Try to go local, find people in your cultural and geographical sphere to help guide you at the beginning and start a process of discovery from there and allow yourself to accommodate tastes foreign to you. The western canon is as separate from my part of the world as my culture's canon might be from yours. TL;DR I agree that a little snobbery goes a long way, but try not to get bogged down with secondhand opinions and form a canon of your own over time.
I think that resting your brain on medium quality media allows you to rest so that when you come across more meaningful work you can fully process the depth of art. I think about it like I think about food - specifically sugar - you loose your sensitivity to sweet when you eat a typical American diet... when you eat a diverse range of foods you get more pleasure from eating desert. Admittedly, it's not a perfect analogy.
If you're referring to the little classics chart I made at 3:37, those are Joy Division - Unknown Pleasures and The Avalanches - Since I Left You. Both excellent records
I don’t believe it! I lived across the street from Harold bloom and my dad was a publishing consultant of his; his wife Gene Bloom baked cupcakes for my and my sisters birthdays every year. This is New Haven Connecticut, on the Yale campus during the 2000s. I’m afraid Harold passed a while ago and Gene just a few years ago. Their memory is very important to me and my family and it’s so crazy just seeing him pop in a RU-vid video
"(Marvel movies) isn't the cinema of human beings trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences to another human being." "Watching a Marvel movie, looking at the impressive special effects, laughing at the quips and getting chills from watching you favorite character can all be very fun. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a theme park." ...Okay, but hear me out: What about Thor's struggle with his own ego and self-worth? What about Bruce Banner/the Hulk's epic multi-movie quest for emotional stability and balance between his two personalities? Tony Stark's severe PTSD changing the course of the entire franchise? Spider-Man being a kid in way over his head and having to grow up much too fast? The sheer lasting impact of heroes dying? _Loki,_ for crying out loud. Hell, I personally found Thanos's entire philosophy to be fundamentally flawed to the point of genuine stupidity, but it sure got people talking about (somewhat crude) moral philosophy. Now I'm not saying the MCU is high art or anything, but I have to disagree with the assertion that they don't "convey emotional, psychological experiences." That's not the primary appeal, perhaps, but they're there. Comparing those stories to theme parks seems disingenuous since theme parks don't typically ask you to contemplate questions of morality, mortality, mental health, and the nature of heroism. (Although, perhaps they should.) I'm just asking, where do you draw the line? How much does a work have to prioritize deeper themes about the human condition over fun and spectacle to qualify as "proper" art? Is the spectacle itself a problem? I think we should be careful not to think about it like that, because that's regressive and unhelpful when trying to evaluate art. If conveying meaningful emotional and psychological experiences to the viewer is the main qualification, then I could argue that Star Wars is a more important work of art to me personally than those of Shakespeare. Because while I have enjoyed Shakespeare, Star Wars has actually has taught me things that influenced my way of thinking and profoundly changed the way I live my life.
Sounds pretty low density to me. Imagine stories that don't need multiple movies to convey a satisfying arc. Either way, I think his point is that we should care more about the quality of the things we spend time on - not that he has concocted the perfect formula for evaluating a piece of art. Low density disposable works should be avoided if possible because our time is limited - the classics are just more likely to embody those things since people have enjoyed them across generations.
