Page 1 of 2
#1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdZ9weP5i68

Does this make you angry?

What if the video were called "Yoko Ono Performs Her Installation at an Art Show?"

Does it still make you angry?

The installation is called:

Voice piece for soprano
Scream.
  • against the wind
  • against the wall
  • against the sky


Does it still make you angry?

It's a 1961 "instruction painting" by Yoko Ono. The idea is that participants in the installation will go up to the microphone and scream into it. The video is of Yoko Ono doing that.

Does it still make you angry?

It gives participants a chance to yell and scream in a museum. There voice is amplified so everyone hears them. This is a hard thing for the average person to do and might be a very liberating experience.

Does it still make you angry?

This is someone reflecting on their experience with the installation in a blog post on the World Wide Web:
I stared at the microphone for a while as a perfectly reasonable voice in my head informed me that I would not, under any circumstances, make a loud noise in a museum. Fifteen long minutes later, after watching several brave souls roar their hearts out in defiance of all propriety, I stepped up to the mic and let out a trio of wavering screams, each slightly less pathetic than the last.

And then it was over. Yoko and I had done it! Together we’d created a work of exhilarating, defiant, liberating art that turned heads, startled passersby, and covered me in a fine sheen of flop sweat.

Does it still make you angry?

Yoko Ono is a classically trained pianist, vocalist and composer. She has also studied poetry and English literature. She was associated with the Fluxus group and studied under John Cage.

Does it still make you angry?

The Fluxus group was rooted in the work of John Cage and Dada. Dada was an art-political movement in the early twentieth century that sprang out of Cubism and other abstract movements. It was the first movement to really ask the question "What is art?" It sought to break down the pretensions and intellectual uniformity of art, redefine aesthetics and reject reason and logic. It was anti-art. They also contributed many important things to art, most notably for us is the idea of performance art.

Does it still make you angry?

I really like it and think it's a good piece.

Does it still make you angry?

The Museum of Modern Art was hosting the installation (along with 15 other Yoko Ono pieces) and due to complaints about the noise from staff and patrons they turned down the volume of the amplification.

This makes me angry.
#2
yoko sucks long live the beatles
Quote by Trowzaa
I wish I was American.

~ A Rolling Potato Gathers No Moss ~
#3
No, it's amazing contemporary music. OBVIOUSLY.

Well, it doesn't make me angry, but I think it's pretty pointless and stupid. If this is art, then I don't even want to be an artist.


------------------------------------------

Fine, it makes me angry.

---------------------------------------

On a second thought, actually it doesn't. It's hilarious.
Last edited by Elintasokas at Apr 19, 2015,
#4
ooooooh snap the saltiness is already here
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#6
Why would this make me angry?

That's the real question, Zach.
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
#7
No, but it made me uncomfortable and gave me that horrible sympathetic embarrassment feeling I get when watching cringe comedy.

Until I read "This is a hard thing for the average person to do and might be a very liberating experience." and that weird awkward feeling disappeared as soon as I got the point of it. Still not something I'd really care to witness or find enjoyable, but it doesn't make me angry. I don't understand why they're calling that a scream though. Sounds like a deaf woman having sex.
#8
Quote by jazz_rock_feel
I really like it and think it's a good piece.
extemporaneous!!

I think it sounds better in reverse (no joke).
Reverse it in Audacity... well I did! (after ripping/converting it first... of course)

In reverse I think it would go good mixed into either of these 2 links:
Pompeii ...OR... Studio

What do you think (of my suggestion)? @Zach and Simon (20T's)
(or anyone else who cares to reverse it).
Last edited by tonibet72 at Apr 20, 2015,
#9
It doesn't make me angry. What makes me angry is people who tell me that it's actually really deep.

I can make a video of me pooing into a bucket and inform you that it's actually a metaphor for society. Do that make you angry? I do several metaphors a day btw.

I think this stuff just really showcases how talented certain artists are at selling their art. If it was some random dude actually shouting in the museum, liberating themselves, I doubt someone would turn away from the Mona Lisa and go "yeah! that's the shit!". But because we're informed previously that it's art we can't go "oh it's someone shouting, how annoying", for fear of the artistic elite shunning our lack of taste.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
Last edited by AlanHB at Apr 20, 2015,
#10
Quote by AlanHB
It doesn't make me angry. What makes me angry is people who tell me that it's actually really deep..

can you describe a purely objective and analytical measurement of 'deep'? What's the units for 'deep'?
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#11
I can make a video of me pooing into a bucket and inform you that it's actually a metaphor for society. Do that make you angry? I do several metaphors a day btw.
"People say if that is art then I could make art. But of course they don't"

I think this stuff just really showcases how talented certain artists are at selling their art. If it was some random dude actually shouting in the museum, liberating themselves, I doubt someone would turn away from the Mona Lisa and go "yeah! that's the shit!". But because we're informed previously that it's art we can't go "oh it's someone shouting, how annoying", for fear of the artistic elite shunning our lack of taste.

You should think about how we separate experiencing art from life

fwiw i think it is a good piece, but then i am biased
#12
^^^ lol

Quote by Baby Joel
can you describe a purely objective and analytical measurement of 'deep'? What's the units for 'deep'?


Fathoms measure depth mate.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#14
Quote by AlanHB
^^^ lol


Fathoms measure depth mate.

congrats on knowing more than one definition of 'depth'. good to see you got through basic schooling ok.

now are you actually going to support your statement of 'i hate when people say this is deep', or are you just gonna sit there and hide behind your dictionary.


btw, avoiding questions and being snarky like that is exactly what got Will banned. so...guess alanhb needs a warning
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#15
Not at all. It's not especially well executed - if she had done something like this with a different purpose, meaning, and effect, it might be totally different.

The idea of having people participate and let out a raw, aggressive sound plays nicely into how we react to that, be it laughing, feeling awkward, uncomfortable from high volume, etc, and there's certainly a social philosophy to that, as is mentioned in the bio, but it's not very well executed, as she's not letting rip and she's going a bit 'look at me, I'm Yokooooooooo' with it.

As a piece of fluxus/dada/noise art it's both old and long done with. Like something by Hanatarash (also screamy and aggressive), it helps to understand how it differs both functionally and philosophically from 'traditional music' (e.g. you don't listen to death metal with the same approach and mindset as, say, Miley Cyrus - when it comes to sound art it's 10 times the case), but it's also about execution. The work has to speak for itself to someone who has at least some knowledge about the surrounding genres. You can make a work that's a pulsing sine-wave and that's it, but you have to ensure the speakers, gallery space, title, and artist bio reveal something about how that might be about something greater than the sum of its parts.

Yoko has done some really interesting work but she's also got a lot of exposure from The Beatles. As such, stuff like this can be pushed towards people dipping their toe into noise + sound art and her fanbase + popularity can increase her public credibility. But people who say 'it's not art' or 'if this is art I don't wanna be an artist' are usually being intentionally ignorant and/or contrarian for the sake of it.
they're coming to take me away
ha-haaa
Last edited by Banjocal at Apr 20, 2015,
#16
I'm with Alan on this one; his shitting in a bucket theory is spot on.

This is completely stupid and worthless, and judging by the comments and likes/dislikes, the majority of mankind would agree. This has no artistic value and literally anyone could do it. You guys are probably the only 5 hipsters in the world who think this has some merit or value as art.
#17
Quote by Elintasokas


This is completely stupid and worthless,

it's not stupid for her. It's not stupid to the dozens of people that were giving applause. It's not worthless cause it got into the bloody MoMA lol

and judging by the comments and likes/dislikes, the majority of mankind would agree.

the majority of mankind has probably never heard of Yoko Ono, and if they have, it's likely to be in connection with Beatles, not for her art.

This has no artistic value

again. MoMA

also, define "artistic value"
and literally anyone could do it.

I don't understand how this invalidates her art

also you must've missed the bit in OP where it said that it's also for participants to yell and scream. So in a very literal way, it was meant for literally anyone to do it.
You guys are probably the only 5 hipsters in the world who think this has some merit or value as art.


zing! you sure got us good there!
and no, we're obviously not, and if we were, why is that a problem?
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
Last edited by Baby Joel at Apr 20, 2015,
#18
honestly both of you really need to sit down, have a drink, and watch some videos of cats until you calm down.
#19
I don't drink though
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#22
In what way is this qualitavely different from Cage's "4:33"? (Four minutes and 33 seconds of crowd noise) There are always those artsy people who think that drivel like this is breakthrough art.
Paint a canvas red and say it's "Minimalist art". Say inane things like "It's not about the image, it's about the paint." (so is a wall.)

Or that sort of avant-garde jazz which sounds like you turned a group of 8-year olds loose in a room full of instruments and told them to "make noise, kids!".

You'll aways find people who are willing to go along and say that they see the emperor's new clothes.
#25
^This is exactly what John had to put up with.

The point is that the factor that makes something music has nothing to do with the noises being produced. The only thing that makes something music is whether or not you decide to listen to it as if it were music.

All noise has musical properties, so everything has the potential to be musical. You decide whether or not it is music in that instant by HOW you decide to listen to it.

Or something like that. Whatever.
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
#26
Quote by Bikewer
In what way is this qualitavely different from Cage's "4:33"? (Four minutes and 33 seconds of crowd noise) There are always those artsy people who think that drivel like this is breakthrough art.
Paint a canvas red and say it's "Minimalist art". Say inane things like "It's not about the image, it's about the paint." (so is a wall.)

Or that sort of avant-garde jazz which sounds like you turned a group of 8-year olds loose in a room full of instruments and told them to "make noise, kids!".

You'll aways find people who are willing to go along and say that they see the emperor's new clothes.
or some people are open-minded and are open to seeing new concepts and ideas in art, as well as appreciating chaos and emptiness in art.

either's good. idk, maybe look into abstract expressionism and dadaism. art has been philosophical and conceptual for centuries. for some reason we are still educated to judge art based purely on how pretty it looks, rather than how it challenges, or what emotions it evokes (it's because that'd be harder than telling schoolkids to paint a still life and shut up for 2 hours).

for example, how does the context of a display of pictures change how we perceive them? if you look at colour theory and interactions between colours, you'll find that different colours of borders change how we 'see' the inner colours. likewise, you can make two colours look like one by arranging them in specific ways (see Josef Albers for this stuff). Expand that to a gallery - that white space does something very different to if it were a brick wall. the 'feel' of the room potentially changes how we see the work. once you apply negative space to it (something minimalism was interested in), you can really change the way someone views and experiences the work in much the same way as you do by changing guitar tone, or a note in a riff, or the instruments used. These movements just push these ideas further into, well, not extremes, but they attempt to toy with them, and see where it goes. It's as experimental as it is expressive of emotions. rothko, for example, attempted to capture raw feelings represented by colours and shapes, using rules of composition and colour theory to manipulate that to make it as strong as possible (he literally used 'blockers' - thin lines of black - to keep the viewer's eye in the image). and if you've ever been to see one of his works IRL, they're terrifying and beautiful. people have cried and had panic attacks in the rothko room. to say its 'just pretentious pseudo-artistry' is to ignore so much history, theory, practice, and people that you may as well pretend they don't exist.
they're coming to take me away
ha-haaa
Last edited by Banjocal at Apr 20, 2015,
#27
Do people really find it hard to yell in a museum?

Even if they're told to? Weird. I wouldn't have any trouble either way.

Anyway

I think this quote is pretty relevant when experiencing art.

"An artist's statement says more than the art ever does"

And I don't see why the word "music" can't be big enough to include both Beethoven and Yoko. Just different kinds with different goals.
#28
^^ These.

Banjocal and Duane got it. Hell, the sound of my internal monologue reading your posts while I type and listen to Ravel, that's some interesting music right there, should I decide to listen to it as such.

But I don't this time, because I'm trying to focus on Ravel and finish JTJ#8.
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
#29
Quote by Baby Joel
congrats on knowing more than one definition of 'depth'. good to see you got through basic schooling ok.

now are you actually going to support your statement of 'i hate when people say this is deep', or are you just gonna sit there and hide behind your dictionary.


btw, avoiding questions and being snarky like that is exactly what got Will banned. so...guess alanhb needs a warning

still waiting for a response
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#30
Quote by Baby Joel
it's not stupid for her. It's not stupid to the dozens of people that were giving applause. It's not worthless cause it got into the bloody MoMA lol

the majority of mankind has probably never heard of Yoko Ono, and if they have, it's likely to be in connection with Beatles, not for her art.

again. MoMA

also, define "artistic value"

I don't understand how this invalidates her art

also you must've missed the bit in OP where it said that it's also for participants to yell and scream. So in a very literal way, it was meant for literally anyone to do it.


zing! you sure got us good there!
and no, we're obviously not, and if we were, why is that a problem?


also waiting for a response
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#31
This is how I think about it.

Being an artist is about consciously deciding to be inspired and trying to synthesize new things from your experiences.

Viewing art is about consciously deciding to gain an insight/new perspective/emotional reaction from and object or experience created by someone else.

They're almost the same thing.


I think a problem that people have is they think art has to be pleasant. Or, at least, what they consider to be pleasant.
#32
I can't warn Alan!

That'd be like some Insane Student vs. Master Japanese Metal Gear Solid Snake Eater Final Battle Kung Fu Samurai Shtick.

Also this thread is about this song now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aHQnDTd1y4
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
#34
Well let's be real:

Snake Eater was a pretty heavy handed metaphor, with the Boss' final mission to die at the hands of Snake in order to prove America's "innocence" in Volgin's blowback.

That and the whole Patriots thing. Kojima slaps you right in the face with the theme/metaphor.

The problem is that I'm pretty sure Kojima thinks the Metal Gear series is a documentary and that this actually happened/is happening.

Also he's kind of a misogynist and supposedly modeled nude for Raiden, and I dunno how I feel about that.
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
#35
It makes me a bit sad that there are people in the world who would post the most god awful thing imaginable and then try to defend it as art, simply because they have a deep seated need to feel superior to others and have decided that demonstrating faux intellectualism is the best way to achieve that.
#36
Quote by Jack Strat
It makes me a bit sad that there are people in the world who would post the most god awful thing imaginable and then try to defend it as art, simply because they have a deep seated need to feel superior to others and have decided that demonstrating faux intellectualism is the best way to achieve that.

why is it the most god awful thing imaginable?
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#37
Except literally nobody except Wil's ghost is claiming superiority via false intellectualism.

We're just saying that that's art too, why you gotta be so exclusive?
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
#38
Quote by Baby Joel
why is it the most god awful thing imaginable?

I simply don't understand your reasoning. We all realize how silly and awful it is with common sense, yet you keep arguing as if you don't see it.
#39
Except it's not. You guys don't get a monopoly on what can and cannot be good.

Maybe not "as good as X with respect to category Y." That you can claim. But you can't dismiss the whole thing as artistically invalid just because you personally choose not to recognize it as art.

Which by the way, you are allowed to do and no one here has a problem with that.

The problem arises when you claim that your conscious decision to not recognize and appreciate its artistic values renders it objectively artistically invalid. That's when it's a big deal. And that I'll argue against any day.
"There are two styles of music. Good music and bad music." -Duke Ellington

"If you really think about it, the guitar is a pointless instrument." - Robert Fripp
#40
^

here's my main problems
Quote by AlanHB
What makes me angry is people who tell me that it's actually really deep.

who are you to say that it's deep for other people? are you telepathic? again, this is why i asked about the 'deepness' of music and if it has a unit. there isn't one. there is nothing in the world that determines if a song or a painting or whatever is deep.
Quote by Elintasokas

This is completely stupid and worthless,

would you be able to explain the criteria needed for something like this to not be stupid and worthless?
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
Last edited by Baby Joel at Apr 20, 2015,
Page 1 of 2