Begrudge this...

orourkeda · 16-05-2011 04:14PM

leggo wrote: »

Almost as tiring as the accusations of 'begrudgery' on places like this are follow-up arguments of "Is it not possible to just think someone is ****e?!"

But, one has to admit, there is a startling track record of popular people, TV shows, movies etc that have an audience who loyally follow their every move and blissfully ignore the criticism. And, for every Twitter follower, there appears to be someone who wants their head on a platter.

See: Jedward, Ray Foley, The Late Late Show, U2. And so on and so forth. All extremely successful in their own fields, all have several megathreads on boards specifically designed to dissect their every move and cross-reference it with their large paycheque with the common thread of "Grrr I hate this guy/these guys/this show/black people!" (wait...the last one is a different argument altogether actually...)

I even had a similar discussion the other day over at the dance music board (this is just a random example to illustrate the point...not looking to re-open the debate).

And, again, you get compelling arguments for loathing each artist individually. But then, when the dust settles, no commercially successful artists are considered to have any kind of discernable talent. They've connected with millions of people, of all different walks of life, but the hardcore fans consider them to have nothing going for themselves. And have strong arguments to back it up. Surely there's something missing there, though? Else the entire world hasn't a clue and we should all bow down to the superior intellectual knowledge of those with 5,000 or more posts on boards. As if they are the anti-Simon Cowell...judging talent while wearing an 'Ifyoucanreadthisimstaringatyourtits' t-shirt.

So, while yes, there is a case that people genuinely don't like a lot of people who've 'made it' and have perfectly valid reasons for doing so...when is the line crossed? When does talent (or lack thereof) cease to be a factor in judgement and sheer old begrudgery begin?

They're alla shower of ****s

holystungun9 · 16-05-2011 04:14PM

General General wrote: »

begrudgers be-a-grudgin',

so lofty in high dudgeon,

coz whores a be-a-whorin',

facebookin', tweetin', sporing..

ain't no use complainin',

coz that's the way it's stayin'...

ah, ah, ah, ah, stayin' alive, stayin' alive
ah, ah, ah, ah, stayin' alllllllliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiivvvvveeeee.....

wibbles · 16-05-2011 05:01PM

Leggo has no friends!

electrogrimey · 16-05-2011 05:06PM

Mainstream pop acts are despised by music snobs because music snobs are the only people who dissect it down to being the formulaic, easily made music that it is, and see that it contains no music merit, only plagiarism of other music. It is a minority that devote their life to studying music, this, the masses, it can be assumed, that like and buy this music don't listen to music this way.

You're argument that the majority are generally right is completely flawed. By this logic, the people who thought the world was flat were right and the people that thought black people were evil were right. It was an overwhelming majority that thought this, and only a small few who argued otherwise. Were they wrong because everyone thought they were?

Irish Guitarist · 16-05-2011 05:18PM

There's plenty of bands or solo artists that I don't like but I wouldn't call them rubbish. These people can sing or play instruments but the music just isn't to my taste. One example would be Gary Barlow from Take That. He can write songs, plays piano and has a decent voice. His music doesn't appeal to me but I definitely wouldn't accuse him of not having talent.

Just because you don't like an artist doesn't mean their work is rubbish. It just means it doesn't appeal to you.

Jedward have become famous by acting like idiots and performing crap versions of famous songs. I'd say that's vastly different from what Take That do. I don't know enough about Justin Bieber to know if he can sing or not.

Saila · 16-05-2011 05:22PM

u2..great bunch of lads

and they all have lovely bottoms

derfderf · 16-05-2011 05:28PM

Op i didn't see the thread in the dance music forum but by any chance were you talking about deadmau5?

Android 666 · 16-05-2011 05:39PM

derfderf wrote: »

Op i didn't see the thread in the dance music forum but by any chance were you talking about deadmau5?

Nah, they're not allowed to talk about Deadmau5 over there since the time a poster starting putting up all his Deadmau5 sex fantasies over on the forum. Needless to say there was vast quantities of butter, lubricant and lots big mouse head eye socket humping mentioned and so now most people just shudder when the name is mentioned.

That and the music is shi-ite!

gargleblaster · 16-05-2011 05:40PM

electrogrimey wrote: »

Mainstream pop acts are despised by music snobs because music snobs are the only people who dissect it down to being the formulaic, easily made music that it is, and see that it contains no music merit, only plagiarism of other music. It is a minority that devote their life to studying music, this, the masses, it can be assumed, that like and buy this music don't listen to music this way.

I agree with this.

Just like movie snobs, music snobs never seem to be able to get the point that not everyone is only interested in art house films, or only interested in groundbreaking, original music. They never can grasp the idea that other people are capable of liking art *and* fun. And they're only making themselves miserable with their whinging and complaining. It's amusing but also sad. Then again there are those who aren't truly unhappy with the state of things at all, and they just enjoy proudly displaying how elite and informed and superior their taste is. That's not sad though, that's more just pathetic.

KrazeeEyezKilla · 16-05-2011 05:49PM

People forget that for any successful people having begrudgers/haterz is the big status symbol. Their life story isn't complete unless they can go on about the nay-sayers and the negative moaners trying to keep them down.

Liam Byrne · 16-05-2011 05:54PM

How is it "begrudgery" though ?

I don't think people know the meaning of the word.

It's like the subset of society who want to read about what Rihanna had for breakfast, or what Katie Price did next, or whatever.

I. DON'T. CARE.

If they're good AT THEIR JOB, then fine.....do it.....they get paid for it and anyone who wants to watch or listen can do so.

I don't care about anything else.

I don't care if you can go for a pint with the Taoiseach (something lots of people said about Bertie) or if Jedward are two sound guys (which they could well be).....I just don't want to hear them when they're doing anything other than their song (which is ironic given the standard of their song, but hey....)

So Jim Corr - make music, don't spout rubbish
Jedward - do your Eurovision act and don't shout half-sentences in American accents
Taoiseach - forget about being a mate and sort out the country
Rihanna - get off Twitter and record a track that'll have the women on the dancefloor that we can at least watch

Simples!

But once a "fan" starts to bull**** about "begrudgery" then it gets people's backs up.

I used to work with a guy who has since gone on to much bigger and better things, being paid way more and getting expenses....and y'know what - he deserves it because he's sound, helpful, damn good and worked hard. I might wish for the same break and working conditions, but I certainly don't "begrudge" him - he deserves it and fair play to him!

But despite the fact that he's a mate and former colleague, if he was ****e or obnoxious I would say so, because the false "you SHOULD support him, no matter how ****e he is, because he's a neighbour, etc" is (at least) half of what's wrong with this country.

Android 666 · 16-05-2011 06:07PM

gargleblaster wrote: »

I agree with this.

Just like movie snobs, music snobs never seem to be able to get the point that not everyone is only interested in art house films, or only interested in groundbreaking, original music. They never can grasp the idea that other people are capable of liking art *and* fun. And they're only making themselves miserable with their whinging and complaining. It's amusing but also sad. Then again there are those who aren't truly unhappy with the state of things at all, and they just enjoy proudly displaying how elite and informed and superior their taste is. That's not sad though, that's more just pathetic.

The inverse is just as likely to happen. You're making the assumption that just because a person has an interest in cinema that they are only going to like arthouse films and are being derogatory because of it. I like films of all kinds but if I say an awful lot of the blockbuster action movies and comedies released in the last decade are vapid and pander the lowest common denominator are you really going to stand there and say I'm being snobbish? I'm not whinging here, I'm merely stating fact and to accuse me of trying to be elitist here would be silly.

Tbf, must people on the electronic music forum would listen to a wide range of music but when they are on that forum they are going to be talking mainly about electronic music, in their own corner without bothering anyone else. Not going through boards loudly proclaiming their music is the best and everybody else is rubbished. What happened with the original poster is that he came onto the electronic music forum and sneered at the notion of 'niche' DJs and was roundly derided for his opinion. If somebody from the electronic music forum went on to the rock music forum and said all metal was crap what do you reckon the outcome would be?

So the OP goes on to a forum sneering at the members, gets it in the neck from everyone on the forum and then comes over to AH licking his wounds and giving out about begrudgery. Does that make sense to you? Doesn't to me...

leggo · 20-05-2011 07:47PM

Sorry, I forgot this thread existed, doh! Turned into a decent debate too.

Android 666 wrote: »

So the OP goes on to a forum sneering at the members, gets it in the neck from everyone on the forum and then comes over to AH licking his wounds and giving out about begrudgery. Does that make sense to you? Doesn't to me...

Haha. This had nothing to do with that, I literally brought it up as an example because it was in my head re: using boards examples of where people could perceive 'begrudgery'. I'm not giving out about that AT ALL and specifically asked that we keep the conversation away from that argument in particular (for fear that it would get hijacked...as it may already have done...) The only mention of begrudgery in that debate was when I said that if any of us were successful enough to slag off the other, we wouldn't be on boards and would be getting bitched about ON boards. It wasn't a major factor so I don't see how you think I'm 'licking my wounds'.

I've also got blasted for respecting Ryan Tubridy before. This isn't my way of having a dig at the people that said that. So chill out with the conspiracy theories.

I was asking if the round dislike of ANYONE commercially viable point to a begrudgery of their success or does it point to something different...as electrogrimey posited here...

electrogrimey wrote: »

Mainstream pop acts are despised by music snobs because music snobs are the only people who dissect it down to being the formulaic, easily made music that it is, and see that it contains no music merit, only plagiarism of other music. It is a minority that devote their life to studying music, this, the masses, it can be assumed, that like and buy this music don't listen to music this way.

A fair point. But also one that suggests that they have almost polluted certain kinds of music for themselves and have therefore harmed their credibility and bias in commenting on said artists?

In reality, listening to hours of varied music doesn't necessarily mean that you are better qualified to judge what music is good and bad. That is a matter of individual opinion.

HOWEVER, if one was looking to differentiate themselves from the crowd, or justify their own strong passion for their preferred music, claiming to be 'more qualified' to do so would be a good way of creating a stick to use to beat other, alternative taste with.

When, at the end of the day, your opinion, mine and that of my 9-year old sister are equally relevant. In that they are individually just one opinion. Anyway, we're getting off-topic.

You're argument that the majority are generally right is completely flawed.

My argument wasn't that the majority are generally right.

My argument was that IF you are going to introduce the perception of "X is stupid for enjoying this", then the only fair way to gauge what is considered right and wrong is by what is most popular. Or else the entire world would be deemed stupid and the word would lose all meaning, thereby rendering the initial point moot anyway.

In reality, enjoyment is subjective to each individual so there is no majority (by way of popularity) OR minority (by way of snobbery and/or perceived 'qualification to judge') rules equation here. Nobody is stupid for enjoying anything. Yes, even Godfather 3, unfortunate as that may be...

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote: »

People forget that for any successful people having begrudgers/haterz is the big status symbol. Their life story isn't complete unless they can go on about the nay-sayers and the negative moaners trying to keep them down.

This is true. Very good point. So, with that said and the fact that we're talking about the nature of begrudgery in mind, back on topic we go!

gargleblaster · 20-05-2011 07:58PM

Android 666 wrote: »

The inverse is just as likely to happen. You're making the assumption that just because a person has an interest in cinema that they are only going to like arthouse films and are being derogatory because of it. I like films of all kinds but if I say an awful lot of the blockbuster action movies and comedies released in the last decade are vapid and pander the lowest common denominator are you really going to stand there and say I'm being snobbish? I'm not whinging here, I'm merely stating fact and to accuse me of trying to be elitist here would be silly.

Not at all. I like arthouse films myself, but I also like 'bad' films. And no I would not say that you are being snobbish if you say that you think those films are vapid, only if you go on to say that anyone who disagrees with you is vapid (or whatever other derogatory word). I didn't mean to say that anyone who doesn't like 'bad' films is a snob, just those who insult vast swaths of people because they disagree with their taste in films.

Tbf, must people on the electronic music forum would listen to a wide range of music but when they are on that forum they are going to be talking mainly about electronic music, in their own corner without bothering anyone else. Not going through boards loudly proclaiming their music is the best and everybody else is rubbished. What happened with the original poster is that he came onto the electronic music forum and sneered at the notion of 'niche' DJs and was roundly derided for his opinion. If somebody from the electronic music forum went on to the rock music forum and said all metal was crap what do you reckon the outcome would be?

So the OP goes on to a forum sneering at the members, gets it in the neck from everyone on the forum and then comes over to AH licking his wounds and giving out about begrudgery. Does that make sense to you? Doesn't to me...

:pac:

No. In no way does that make sense. Thanks for filling me in on the background. People are funny.

leggo · 20-05-2011 08:18PM

gargleblaster wrote: »

No. In no way does that make sense. Thanks for filling me in on the background. People are funny.

It doesn't make sense because it's not what happened. More a case of someone saying "Woah relax, why are we slagging off one section of DJs when they can say this about another section?" Then everyone jumping on the high horse saying, "HEY HE'S ONE OF THEM DJs SAYING THAT ABOUT US! LET'S GET HIM!" Then me saying, "Em I wasn't actually saying that..."

And pretty much just constant trolling since then. You've seen one of the troll accounts pop up in this thread, for example.

But let's leave that to that board instead. Trust me, everyone's heads will be better for it. We're talking about the nature of begrudgery here.

If it'll keep the debate worth having, let's leave dance music out of it. It was a random example so we've loads still to go on.

electrogrimey · 20-05-2011 11:53PM

leggo wrote: »

In reality, listening to hours of varied music doesn't necessarily mean that you are better qualified to judge what music is good and bad. That is a matter of individual opinion.

HOWEVER, if one was looking to differentiate themselves from the crowd, or justify their own strong passion for their preferred music, claiming to be 'more qualified' to do so would be a good way of creating a stick to use to beat other, alternative taste with.

The whole point is that music is not solely about enjoyment. McDonalds is often more enjoyable than bacon and cabbage, that doesn't mean it's good food. A major factor in the critical judgement of music is its depth, complexity, musical merit, and hopefully, inherent genius. The fact is that the majority of popular music, with the obvious exceptions of people like Queen, the Beatles etc, have very little depth, complexity, musical merit, or inherent genius, they're simply enjoyable. Much like McDonalds.

So, taking into account the other factors involved in critically judging music, naturally those who are more learned in assessing depth, complexity, and musical merit, perhaps with knowledge of musical theory, history, and harmony, are indeed more qualified to judge than someone taking it at face value.

You need to realise that it's not simply one opinion against an alternative opinion, there is a huge amount of fact involved. Your thinking of music is very like a religious person's view on religion. They believe blindly that it's simply opinion vs opinion, whereas the atheist has a huge amount of fact on his side.

Donal Og O Baelach · 21-05-2011 12:04AM

leggo wrote: »

so...when is the line crossed? When does talent (or lack thereof) cease to be a factor in judgement and sheer old begrudgery begin?

Good question.

I don't think there is a line there at all, they are 2 different things. To state that someone has no talent is a valid and worthy argument to make - but to attack someone personally, (make fun of their intellect, weight, style of dress, etc,) because they have no talent, is quite irrational and implies some kind of inferiority issue from the poster.

Android 666 · 21-05-2011 12:28AM

Donal Og O Baelach wrote: »

Good question.

I don't think there is a line there at all, they are 2 different things. To state that someone has no talent is a valid and worthy argument to make - but to attack someone personally, (make fun of their intellect, weight, style of dress, etc,) because they have no talent, is quite irrational and implies some kind of inferiority issue from the poster.

Nah, I don't believe that at all. If I call Liam Gallagher a talentless, scarf wearing mongoloid it's not because I have an inferiority complex or I'm a begrudger. It's because it's the truth.

Kanoe · 21-05-2011 12:38AM

poor minds talk about people etc..I don't get people who sit around and talk about other people all the time, or celebrity....bores the f/ck out of me

Donal Og O Baelach · 21-05-2011 12:53AM

Android 666 wrote: »

Nah, I don't believe that at all. If I call Liam Gallagher a talentless, scarf wearing mongoloid it's not because I have an inferiority complex or I'm a begrudger. It's because it's the truth.

Fair point.
But (after the talentless bit) you are no longer talking about his abilities (or lack of) as a musician/singer etc. You're talking about his scarf, and his resemblance to a native of Mongolia. Why do you care about his scarf? What makes you take the time to type a comment on it?

leggo · 21-05-2011 01:32AM

Yeah, I think you've hit on something there Donal.

It's not that people necessarily dislike someone because they're rich and famous, and then tag on the talentless line as a form of validating that begrudgery. It's the fact that people may dislike them because of their perceived lack of talent, THEN the jealousy kicks in and the begrudgery begins to unravel.

And, while it might sound petty, part of it is very understandable. Jedward, for example, aren't doing anything that the rest of us can't. I can bleach my hair, spike it, sing out of key, talk in a pseudo-American accent and do a cartwheel (okay...I'll need practise to do the latter but I'm sure it'd be possible). Yet they are millionaires with possible financial security for life and I'm not.

While MY line wouldn't be to take the jealous route and to just focus on sorting my own life out, I couldn't blame others for doing so. Especially when people hit hard times etc. It mightn't be healthy, but jealousy is human nature.

So can we conclude that begrudgery mostly consists of an initial dislike of someone's talent (or lack thereof) + over-exposure + jealousy?

leggo · 21-05-2011 01:49AM

electrogrimey wrote: »

So, taking into account the other factors involved in critically judging music, naturally those who are more learned in assessing depth, complexity, and musical merit, perhaps with knowledge of musical theory, history, and harmony, are indeed more qualified to judge than someone taking it at face value.

You need to realise that it's not simply one opinion against an alternative opinion, there is a huge amount of fact involved. Your thinking of music is very like a religious person's view on religion. They believe blindly that it's simply opinion vs opinion, whereas the atheist has a huge amount of fact on his side.

See, define 'more qualified' as used in that context.

It's not like a mechanic evaluating a car here. This is ALL art (all the way down to the Macarena).

This is something that popped into someone's mind, may have been developed down the line by others, and ultimately put out into the public domain with the hope of connecting. And, in most cases, making some cash...but one of the few things we agree on is that there's nothing wrong with making a euro.

So, from that standpoint, there IS no right or wrong.

A mechanic looks to fix your engine in order to make it last longer. If one can make it last longer than another, he is more qualified in his trade. Simple.

A musician develops something from nothing to simply entertain, inspire or provide some escapism for others. If they do so, by whatever means, job done. While YOU may care about the nuts and bolts, others may just want to hear something catchy and repetitive.

There is no one common goal or bar that is set to qualify good music. It's all in the eye of the beholder. So, no, you cannot claim that you are a better or more qualified beholder than the next person because not ALL music is catered towards yours (or my) specific taste. To think so is simple snobbery and nothing more.

ascanbe · 21-05-2011 02:16AM

The original post has two thanks, already. That's at least one too many for my liking; it's getting a bit too popular.
I'll just dismiss it without reading it, fully; it's obviously of little value.

electrogrimey · 21-05-2011 02:30AM

leggo wrote: »

A musician develops something from nothing to simply entertain, inspire or provide some escapism for others. If they do so, by whatever means, job done. While YOU may care about the nuts and bolts, others may just want to hear something catchy and repetitive.

There is no one common goal or bar that is set to qualify good music. It's all in the eye of the beholder. So, no, you cannot claim that you are a better or more qualified beholder than the next person because not ALL music is catered towards yours (or my) specific taste. To think so is simple snobbery and nothing more.

Did you read my post at all?

The idea that one can't possibly judge art is absolutely ridiculous. If that's true, than I (I can't draw for my life) could paint something, but it up against a Monet, and say they're of equal merit and worth, when that simply isn't true. It's also saying that no-one can say a 10 year old's first attempt at composing is equally as good as Strauss' Alpine Symphony. Would you call anyone who said Strauss' masterpiece was better a snob?

I can't really believe someone who is trying to make money from music can have this mindset...It's baffling.

leggo wrote: »

See, define 'more qualified' as used in that context.

Again, you clearly haven't read my post. One who has studied music for years, has mastered music theory, and is versed in the history of popular, folk and art music is unarguably more qualified to judge than someone tone-deaf, who doesn't know what's happening in the music they're hearing, and only likes music because of familiarity.

What you're not understanding, is that while there is a huge amount of opinion and taste in music, moreso than as you said, engineering, or science, it doesn't stop at simply opinion. There is also science and engineering in music. A folk song with 3 chords and a pentatonic melody and call and response vocals is not, and no-one can argue that it is, on the same level as hugely intricate and complex symphonies. Even the folk singer won't argue that.

You clearly have no background in musical training if you're trying to argue this.

Proof of the fact that there is more to music than opinion, is the fact that people can appreciate music they don't like. Someone can play me a musically interesting heavy metal track, with complex polyrythms or time signatures in the drums, and beautiful harmonies in the guitar, and even if I can't stand the music, I can appreciate its musical merit. In my opinion, that song is terrible, but I know for a fact that it is a good song, even if I don't like it.

leggo · 21-05-2011 02:42AM

electrogrimey wrote: »

Did you read my post at all?

The idea that one can't possibly judge art is absolutely ridiculous.

It is ridiculous, I agree.

So why are you suggesting that I said it? You really need to stop accusing people of not reading your post then reading whatever suits you into theirs.

It's the more qualified part that is the bone of contention here. I've put it in bold again in case you missed me doing the same in your last quote.

Art, music included, is THERE to be judged...by all. There is no qualification for judging it...therefore nobody more or less qualified to do so. Simple as.

However, you seem determined to prove beyond doubt that YOU are more qualified than anyone else to declare what is good, enjoyable, fun and, in turn, poor. Your opinion is just that. Get off the high horse.

electrogrimey · 21-05-2011 02:55AM

leggo wrote: »

It is ridiculous, I agree.

So why are you suggesting that I said it? You really need to stop accusing people of not reading your post then reading whatever suits you into theirs.

I read your post, and know what you meant. If everyone is allowed judge, and nobody is allowed be right or wrong, then there is no way to come to a conclusion, therefore no decisive judgement can't be made, therefore in this system art cannot be judged.

Sorry for not taking you through that step by step last time.

leggo wrote: »

It's the more qualified part that is the bone of contention here. I've put it in bold again in case you missed me doing the same in your last quote.

Art, music included, is THERE to be judged...by all. There is no qualification for judging it...therefore nobody more or less qualified to do so. Simple as.

No, it is not simple as. As I keep saying in my posts, there is more to music, and art in general, than opinion based judgement. There is a qualification for judging it, it's called education. Do you disregard every musical, and artistic, competition in the world, on the basis that the hugely respected and educated judges have no more basis than judging than a someone who has never heard a note of music/read a book/seen a piece of art in their life?

leggo wrote: »

However, you seem determined to prove beyond doubt that YOU are more qualified than anyone else to declare what is good, enjoyable, fun and, in turn, poor. Your opinion is just that. Get off the high horse.

No idea where you're getting that from. You're making sweeping statements that no poetry, art, literature, or music is better than any other, and I'm calling you out on that bizarre argument. I don't see how that's anything to do with me being on a high horse.

Do you believe that the most recent issue of the daily mail is equal in merit to Joyce Ulysses? To avoid you distracting from the answer, let's assume that both were entered in a literary competition, to be judged by an esteemed panel of judges, who would judge with no opinion or bias, much like every art competition.

Which would you think should win?

leggo · 21-05-2011 03:41AM

Your questions are terrible examples, in fairness. :rolleyes:

What sort of ridiculous competition would pit a newspaper and a book against each other to be judged on artistic merit?! They're two completely different mediums serving two completely different purposes!

You seem to be creating unrealistic hypothetical arguments out of the sky just for the sole purpose of saying "What I like is better than what you like so myeh!

"

therefore no decisive judgement can't be made

Today, you may just have stumbled across the concept of subjectivity!

It's not a case of there being no point in judging if someone can't be right or wrong, it's a case of the fact that if someone wins competitions like The X Factor or a Grammy Award, I won't necessarily be forced to enjoy their music as a result. And nor will you.

And while it gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling inside to know that I have helped you learn something new today, what exactly has any of this to do with begrudgery?!

So please either accept the points above or take your intolerance for other's opinions elsewhere. Thank you.

electrogrimey · 21-05-2011 03:44AM

leggo wrote: »

What sort of ridiculous competition would pit a newspaper and a book against each other to be judged on artistic merit?! They're two completely different mediums!

Many artistic competitions are judging very different mediums, perhaps sculpture and painting, violin and piano, poem and short story, etc. One can quite easily judge artistic merit across different mediums.

Today, you may just have stumbled across the concept of subjectivity!
[/QUOTE]

My whole argument, which you keep ignoring, is that while subjectivity is a part of art, it is not the whole part. There are many other fact based factors which can be judged without subjectivity.

leggo · 21-05-2011 03:48AM

Right, grand. We don't agree. I didn't see that one coming.

Moving on...

electrogrimey · 21-05-2011 04:38AM

leggo wrote: »

Right, grand. We don't agree. I didn't see that one coming.

Moving on...

That's your argument? You discredit every single artistic competition in the world, and any critic's review of any piece of art ever, by stating that no piece of art or music is any better than any other, and then just say that we disagree? Do you not realise that there's something hugely wrong with that idea?

I'm taking your lack of response as that you've just been proven wrong, and now you're going to say stuff like 'I've had enough of this/this is off topic/it's just a difference of opinion' to get out of it.

Begrudge this...

Comments