Comments on: If you paint it, it will open

By: GG

GG — Fri, 12 Oct 2012 17:37:34 +0000

Yeah, I remember being a freshman in undergrad and thinking my totally banal arguments were over everyone’s head rather than just hackneyed/inappropriate. Yes, we all know what “meta” means (and even what “simulacrum” means, although you’re not exactly using it correctly!). This is all just making me grateful I grew out of that stage many years ago, here’s hoping you do too, whataperv!

TL;DR: Man, KIDS.

By: Whataperv

Whataperv — Fri, 12 Oct 2012 16:40:18 +0000

What an ironic comment.

By: Whataperv

Whataperv — Fri, 12 Oct 2012 16:39:57 +0000

Google it.

By: live_fast_die_

live_fast_die_ — Fri, 12 Oct 2012 07:20:18 +0000

i dinned and ditched from there when i was 17 (1987) they didn’t chase me but waited for me outside the Chatterbox (what’s it called now?) the man only asked that i didn’t come back until i could not only pay my bill but pre-pay before I ate there again.

Stuck in the Mission cause my rent is soooooooo cheap!!! (Knock on wood)

By: Ariel Dovas

Ariel Dovas — Fri, 12 Oct 2012 06:24:48 +0000

What if we renamed the blog Meta Meta?

Oh wait, has this gone on long enough that it has now become meta again?

If I misuse meta enough ways in this response will your head eat itself?

By: blah

blah — Fri, 12 Oct 2012 03:16:40 +0000

That was too long and not funny at all. You lose.

By: moto-waki

moto-waki — Fri, 12 Oct 2012 01:13:51 +0000

hey, whataperv knows how to copy & paste!

By: Whataperv

Whataperv — Fri, 12 Oct 2012 00:20:33 +0000

A few points about art and life:

First of all, calling anything meta-life is pedantic. Meta-life would technically be a self-referential life, which a person’s life is. All persons are live in reference to the act and meaning of living in some way or another.

Mimesis and meta-art aren’t the same thing. Mimesis, as you suggest, is basically all art. However, there’s nothing “meta” or “meta-art” about a representation. Magritte’s “The Treachery of Images” is meta-art. Renoir’s “Lilies” is not. If you’d like me to explain why, I can. Or, someone can “google it.”

The term meta-art should be confined to art about the creation or reception of art or else the term has no meaning. While one could make an argument about how all art is about the creation or reception of art, it would be pedantic.

It’s the same thing with simulacrums. Simulacrums are not the same as a simple representation or the same as “meta-art.” They have to do with representations of representations and while there are differences of opinion about what a simulacrum is, these opinions do not typically include self-referencing as being identical to or necessary for a simulacrum.

The term “meta” is beginning to be overused in the same way “ironic” is overused. This is why I don’t simply take someone’s word that the painter is in that painting. Also, whether or not the restaurant is open in the painting has no relationship to whether or not it’s “meta,” but it would make it a simulacrum.

By: MrEricSir

MrEricSir — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 23:28:30 +0000

If you went to college, you’d know that “meta” is a prefix, not a word.

By: moto-waki

moto-waki — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 23:23:55 +0000

and in the painting la rondalla is open for business.

By: marco

marco — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 23:14:05 +0000

Yea, Jesus Christ! What is happening to our youth?

By: blah

blah — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 22:46:45 +0000

It’s meta whether or not he is painting himself. Art is meta-life. It’s mimesis, it’s representation, it’s a simulacrum. Jesus Christ, didn’t anybody go to fucking college?

By: moto-waki

moto-waki — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 22:31:45 +0000

i am not the painter & i cannot see the painter in his painting. i’m giving soccerkarate the benefit of the doubt that he knows what he’s talking about & imagining that the artist is obscuring his own image within his work.

we all clear now?

By: GG

GG — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 22:18:01 +0000

I can’t tell if Whataperv’s trolling is the best ever or worst ever.

By: Whataperv

Whataperv — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 21:49:25 +0000

You can see that in the picture above? I see a man painting a picture of the building from the perspective he’s painting from with the section he could be painted in obscured by the painter. Are you the painter?