Nothing is punk anymore...

[@Matheusss89]

Everyone wants art to push boundaries until it pushes their boundaries.

[@QualityCandor]

Truer than most care to admit.

[@giulyanoviniciussanssilva2947]

It's the opposite, people demand that stagnation return.

[@jump.jessse]

midwit take. paradise is based in a boundary. reach for paradise. not piss christ. not a tranny eating dog shit. thats not actually art. thats more like reddit gold.

[@SauloA333]

​@@giulyanoviniciussanssilva2947 Aren't we already stagnated?

[@escarlit]

@@giulyanoviniciussanssilva2947 i think you’re both right

[@kipphz]

“But I don't want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness, I want sin." ― Aldous Huxley, Brave New World

[@foxtrotfunky]

I always forget that Adlous Huxley's Brave New World is so excellently written. Not only conceptually, but the writing itself is gorgeous. This line reminded me, I have to read Island by Adlous Huxley next.

[@JDStone20]

THIS! Comfort is poison, it is toxic to the soul!

[@jub7345]

Oh shit I haven't heard about that one I'll have to check it out

[@abraxasjinx5207]

"I was lost in a valley of pleasure I was lost in the infinite sea I was lost and measure for measure Love spewed from the heart of me I was lost and the cost And the cost didn't matter to me I was lost and the cost Was to be outside society." Patti Smith

[@marmadukescarlet7791]

@@jub7345Huxley’s Island: much maligned (used to be) hard to find. I read it as a young whipper-snapper and loved it. It centres on the use of magic shrooms on an isolated, utopian island. Huxley was losing his eyesight as he wrote it.

[@worrydoll1644]

had a chat with a plumber who came to my house the other day. i sat and talked to him whilst he fixed my boiler but we ended up talking for just over two hours about our differing perspectives on art, economics, politics and life in general. we didn’t agree on some things, but despite the 30 year gap in age between us we went into the conversation willing to learn from each other and respecting each other totally. it made me remember what being a human is actually like. plus my heating is fixed now!

[@peybak]

Have you seen the Australian film, The Plumber? It's pretty good.

[@reefk8876]

Imagine if you sat there and gave him your opinion on plumbing and how/what plumbing is all because you’re in the same room..

[@bacarandii]

Which of you is on which end of the 30-year gap between you?

[@andmoreagain7]

That's what life is all about!

[@NurseAyan]

Love this. Thank you for sharing ❤️

[@NolanSimon-p2j]

First off let me say that this is a fantastic video, voicing a frustration I think a lot of people feel. Pointing to the loss of subculture, a loss of “those in the know” popular voices, a widespread inability to engage across superficial stylistic boundaries - these are all huge topics in need of more focus and discussion. But where I think this video is off the mark is in its diagnosis of the malady, and the problem occurs early in the analysis. The Cinema Cartography tosses out the key almost right out of the gate - the root of punk is politics, and the desire to de-politicize art is exactly the same procedure occurring in the commodification of everything we love. We don’t live in an era where no one is willing to push boundaries. We live in an era where a handful companies control most of what you see, and they have done everything in their power to make you feel powerless to change that. Beyond a superficial nod to Takrovsky’s orthodoxy, and the Marxism of the New Wave, there is no desire here to recon with the political possibilities these artists were inspired by. Pasolini’s vulgarity and reverence were in direct relation to his queerness and Marxist politics in opposition to Italian Fascism. Paglia’s playing second fiddle to Sontag grows out of Sontag’s commitment to politics and culture - working to make the world better and more interesting for her and her queer friends - winning out over Paglia’s erratic trollish provocations. My need to comment was inspired by the suggestion at 39:37 that Odd Nerdrum might be the “greatest living painter.” This strikes me as part and parcel of the problem - Nerdrum is not Waters. He’s not someone who has a deep appreciation of his genre, or any other. Waters is a provocative polymath and queer icon. Nerdrum is an angry white nationalist who insists that “good” painting stopped in 1700 (after the death of Rembrandt). He dismisses everything made over the last 150 years as decadent cosmopolitanism. To confront this juxtaposition and be unable to say, “sure Nerdrum can paint but the work itself is superficial, ignorant and provocative for provocation’s sake” suggests that all you want is to be provoked. Vulgarity without purpose. This isn’t at all to say that people with bad politics can’t make good art. Far from it. But it *is* to say that without the ability to utilize a political lens when analyzing art, especially in public discourse, is to commit the same crime as the commodifiers - to render it *just* an image, just another thing to be slotted into a “top ten,” just another meaningless product to be affiliated with.

[@qwopiretyu]

Thanks for taking the time to write this. You've reminded me of an aspect of my self I forgot for a while. Artist criticism. The art stands on its own but the intent of the creator doubly inform the piece.

[@meh6757]

Well said.

[@redredredred3809]

Hit the nail on the head here.

[@elyse1961]

This!!! 👏❤ You are so well informed! The mixing of politics and human complexities in art is what makes it compelling, you can’t understand something fully if you don’t know what sparked it, what is it saying. I really like how you put this, amazing job!

[@bigcheese2128]

DING DING DING

[@TomSka]

Really interesting piece. Had to keep pausing it because it kept prompting debates between my partner and I. I do think your read on Promising Young Woman is unfair though as the film is clearly more reflective of people like Brock Turner than Elliot Rodger.

[@neverangel24officialytchan87]

Beep beep, I’m a sheep! I said beep beep, I’m a sheep! 🐑

[@majimasmajimemes1156]

I have a feeling that these open-minded people still exist, they just don't spend their time on the internet, precisely because the algorithms and rage-bait have made it into such a thoroughly infuriating and toxic place. Also, finally someone shares my hate for the toothless-nes of Promising Young Woman.

[@johnsailorsgoat]

Titane is the movie PYW wanted to be and BEYOND!

[@VoltageNostalgia]

We exist. I get the sense from many that they don't think my openness is genuine. It's very difficult to be very open minded with people who aren't. Which leads me and others to not express our open views, unless we find another like us. You'll only find open minded people when you open your mind

[@lpfbjorge]

Indeed. Not quite rage bait but with similar effect, the last 6-ish months I've been engaging somewhat regularly with reddit and have realized the futility of controversial discussion (even non political) there give how often OPs are based on empty platitudes or ridiculing memes. I quit It pretty much, except to help with things, to get help with things, and memes

[@Ray_D_Tutto]

@@VoltageNostalgia 100% I can generally sense when someone is open minded and will open up. You articulated it so well.

[@lilithperson6266]

You're right. Expression on major social media outlets is much more limiting than many realize or want to accept. In many cases, the medium is the message. The "punk" alternative to Instagram isn't happening on Instagram, it is out here creating its own platforms for expression. And the branches of "punk" that are extending into Instagram aren't friendly with the algorithm.

[@doodly1152]

I feel like the word punk gets thrown around so often that I don't know what it means anymore. If I make something "traditional" or "high art" in a setting where its viewed as "square" would that be considered punk? Maybe "sincerity" is a better word. Nothing is sincere anymore.

[@jerrrdy]

Punk is both ‘anti’ & ‘anti-anti.’ To learn the foundations only to finally reject it, and then declare war on the system of those foundations. This is how new genres are created. All mediums of art experience this. That is punk.

[@megamcee]

I know this will be a really weird example, but I feel like it fits. 3 days ago Genshin released the final part of a story arc. The story arc itself has been kinda disliked by the supposed "fans" of the game, but this finale became nearly hated by those people. It has been called cringe, simplistic, boring, etc. All because the entire arc was about a culture of people that have experienced great tragedy and loss, yet instead of just crying or being depressed about it - they sang, celebrated their dead and always came together to win against the forces of evil (the main slogan of the arc has been "No one fights alone"). And at the end of the arc the player returns victorious and there's a whole big celebration for us, with dancing, singing and good vibes among friends. And there's a little optional scene where you character can join some npcs for a dance and the dance you do is real campy and silly, but it's just really heartfelt and is pretty much exactly what the entire story has been about. And yet countless people online have deemed that dance as one of the cringiest things the game has ever done. So, in other words, I totally agree with you that sincere things are rarely made these days, for the exact reason I laid out above. People, for some reason, have started hating on sincerity so damn much that any artists find if hard/scary/unprofitable to release that kind of content. And so the ones who DO release sincere content would definiely be considered punk right now.

[@younghegelian1]

who cares what it means do what you want

[@mrbenoit5018]

Punk is when u rock out

[@doodly1152]

​@@mrbenoit5018 now THAT'S a definition I like

[@mikellyy]

There’s no collective culture to rebel against. It’s just an ocean of content that seems to have no timeline anymore and everyone is in their little silo of content. Art serves life. But at this point, content is life. Punk would require not having a smart phone.

[@littlestbroccoli]

Yep

[@bitnev]

This.

[@kozlorog]

Literally this. How can there be a counter-culture if there is no shared culture to begin with? There is not a single culture a man is exposed to nowadays, but a mirriad of various cultures. One can be conservative in one culture and punk in the other at the same time. Counter-cultures of the past succeded. They won. They secured the existence of their values, fracturing societies at the same time. The most "punk" thing you can do now is actually be a conservative striving for a shared culture. Now try stating values of that sort and you will get the punk treatment from people around you!

[@thatpak]

rebel against capitalism, bourgeois materialism.

[@bitnev]

@@thatpak why?

[@vraisairs9201]

The problem is that “punk” has been commodified. No matter how transgressive or abstract, the capital class will find a way to sell it for $14.99 at Spencer’s Gifts And if something is truly TOO TRANSGRESSIVE to be commodified, it is because it is legitimately horrible. Snuff films aren’t punk. Hurling slurs isn’t punk. Swaztikas aren’t punk. The stuffed shirts of the 1980s were much more vanilla than our stuffed shirts. What can we do today that shows nonconformity that isn’t just awful or violent?

[@user-vx3wc8yc9v]

Hurling slurs is definitely punk, even historically it was. Punks were notorious foul mouths. Also actually insane you would compare saying mean words to something like a snuff film.

[@vraisairs9201]

@@user-vx3wc8yc9v it depends. Saying taboos and speaking “improperly” is punk. Yelling “fuck the Queen” or “kill the fascists”. But it’s not punk to harass minorities. That is very traditional. And I apologize if it came off like I was calling slurs as bad as murder. Obviously not.

[@SomboonCM]

Get a MAGA hat....

[@georgethompson913]

​@@vraisairs9201So it's only punk when it's against the socially taboo groups?

[@smauggerr]

fursuits are personalised tailored wearable pieces of art, furries aren't horrible, but a lot fo people think they are "too different"

[@springtimebeatz6599]

I’m a strong film lover, and I love all sorts of films, but I’m absolutely bothered by what’s happening in modern times, people claim to be open minded but are in reality narrow and intolerant. I love that you made this video, do not be scared to speak your mind.

[@learnt2love]

modernity is not a surplus this is not a youtube comment

[@eveconnie]

This video encapsulates what I've wanted to scream from the rooftops about appreciating and creating art in all it's various forms, in such an articulate way. This is my favorite video you've released thus far.

[@TrevorHamberger]

You should see my music library. It's almost a terabyte.

[@learnt2love]

u right

[@lsdc1]

I too am not a bit tamed, I too am untranslatable, I sound my barbaric yawp over the roofs of the world. - ww, song of myself

[@SkylerMillerTheBronxProject]

It feels good to know I wasn't insane.

[@JoeJoe-nb3lt]

Same

[@RallyTheTally]

Same here.

[@destroyer841]

Truly. I finally see what women who watch She Hulk mean when they say “I feel seen”.

[@TwisterTornado]

​@@destroyer841 What does that mean?

[@SkylerMillerTheBronxProject]

@@destroyer841 amen

[@mdel07304]

I think the issue is that the art that IS being made in a punk context just isn’t seen by many, not that it doesn’t exist. I grew up in NYC with a father who was a graffiti writer in the late 70s/early 80s. He instilled in me an appreciation for art in all its forms, while also being realistic about how as his own style was being commodified by the traditional art space. I think this is why I truly appreciate vandal graffiti more than murals and “street art” Recently, due to family issues, I had to move back to our native Puerto Rico, and so far it’s been reshaping my idea of art and what I consider valuable in that space. Mainly because young people are reclaiming their craft and experimenting on a large scale. I’d say that to view any semblance of “punk” mentality in art, you have to explore the places that exist in the lesser-known parts of the art world.

[@bigtechisbigbrother8690]

Don't come back.

[@mdel07304]

@ are you ok gang? What’s with the anger?

[@marcomartins3563]

​@@mdel07304probably related to you being a vandal that likes to make stuff worse

[@pank3245]

Since you grew up in NYC I highly recommend checking out Jean-Michel Basquiat. He definitely supports your claim.

[@mdel07304]

@ While I respect Basquiat, his politics, aesthetics, and overall work, the way he’s been embraced by these newer generations is definitely NOT punk and counters a lot of the things that he spoke against during his lifetime.

[@dreamspheree]

Thanks you for this. Honestly, I can't put it in words. I've stopped doing art from around COVID times, I have just been jaded with all these commercial arts I lived in New York and for a period I went every week for galleries on opening nights. Even stood next to Marina Abramowicz and other artists randomly in some events. I also loved walking and viewing the lobbies of great midtown sky scrapers modern and old however I felt like art today like you said is soooo unified and I could not explain also, I felt like the modern art today is like trying very hard to reach those luxury apartments or law firms, or art investment it took me away from the art world, and moreover made me super jaded to everything art, everything is like leaning to the same direction sad. Where I feel like the 2000 till the Facebook boom of 2007ish. Sorry for my mumble thanks again.

[@AliceMonroe-u7z]

I wanted to agree with you, and I do in many instances, but I was disappointed when you’ve taken people who are often talked about (positively or negatively) and regurgitated information that’s already available along with some angsty speech. 99% of art isn’t punk anymore, no shit. Have you seen the condition of the world? Capitalism doesn’t value individual opinion, it doesn’t value art for what art is supposed to do. Nobody wants to die a poor starving artist, which is what often happens to a lot/most artists isn’t it? That or they give up. If you really wanna be punk, look at underground artists who are keeping the spirit alive. Everyone you’ve mentioned is a well known, mainstream or highly regarded in their areas - and yes, it’s good to know the masters, but that’s also lazy and that’s not punk.

[@cornkobmansanto17]

What artists would you draw attention to regarding this subject?

[@useruseruser501]

When has the condition of the world been conducive for more punk art being created?

[@useruseruser501]

Has the individual ever been valued?

[@sullen-girl]

“i trust that you’re smart enough to know what punk means” AKA i reallyyy don’t want to have to define this term that’s central to my thesis

[@KristofskiKabuki]

I’m not sure what exactly you mean by “punk” here… as someone who’s both been involved with punk communities and written about it in an academic context I would say it’s defined by DIY creation/organising and building something outside corporate/capitalist interests, and you only touch on that briefly The idea that Punk is primarily about transgression for the sake of it was created by corporate culture as an attempt to protect itself from it (see the Sex Pistols as an example)

[@theghostoftupac2662]

Rage against the machine until you become the machine

[@Yora21]

Producing content that conforms to someone's expectation of what punk is supposed to be is not punk.

[@KyleWatters71]

lol ofc you brought capitalism in to it. That’s like claiming fascism can only be right wing 😂 Just bc certain things are traditionally associated with something doesn’t mean they are exclusively associated.

[@operator1717]

Pop music is corporate culture🙄

[@joshandrus]

@@KristofskiKabuki This right here. We could parallel that with John Berger’s thoughts on advertising - how it pretends to interpret and explain the world to us by abusing our past realities, struggles and events - eventually making our actual reality unrecognizable…

[@k-203_DV]

I agree with the general sentiment that art should challenge societal and establishment norms. But I also think you are overlooking something about those who you disagree with that adds nuance to their approach to art. Many of the people who refuse to watch a Roman Polanski film or listen to a Marilyn Manson album, are not doing so because they necessarily deny the "greatness" of the work, but rather because they don't want to finance or enable the artist - who in those cases have gone unpunished for their actual crimes. And I think it is both punk and logical to have this mentality, and there are plenty of examples of undeniably punk artists with this mentality that back me up. The one that comes directly to mind is Kurt Cobain, who famously told his fans not to listen to Guns N Roses because Axl Rose was a homophobe and a misogynist who liked to beat women. So, I don't think this is something which should be overlooked or dismissed.

[@TomSeliman99]

And those people are shallow and lame, and not worth engaging with who can't look past the person to see their great work. Kurt Cobain was a depressed loser who killed himself. Axel is alive and kicking today

[@user-ks8ux4ig6b]

I get that but, in many ways, the bar for what should or shouldn't be shunned feels like it's gotten lower and lower and if you try, for example, to make an argument for why it's ok to watch a Polanski film you run the great risk of being attacked as a kind of enabler or that you'd secretly like to engage in the same behavior.

[@flazeda8743]

I mean we all know ways of watching a Polanski/ listening to Manson without giving a penny to them. Also you don't enable them by enjoying their art since it's not you making a comment about their life imo.

[@luismarioguerrerosanchez4747]

If you have a solid reason for why refusing to watch or do something, fine, that's a position, but if you're going to follow a crowd because some dead guy said so, then you're a sheep.

[@PsyX99]

​@@luismarioguerrerosanchez4747We're all others sheep. That tje biggest sheep thought : "I'm kot a sheep". Can we stop we that argument already ?

[@Analysis_Paralysis]

This is not punk, it's centrism.

[@backwardsbandit8094]

Centrism isn't real. People can have a mix of opinions that could be considered left wing or some that are considered rightwing. There is no widespread political movement for people who just fence-sit on everything and don't really care either way. Those people don't concern themselves with politics.

[@preparedfarmer]

Kindness is punk rock. Being a tradesman is punk rock. Being a good father is punk rock. Being undefinable is punk rock.

[@liamshenk5202]

you ain't no punk, punk

[@preparedfarmer]

@@liamshenk5202 look out everybody the arbiter of punk has entered the chat

[@backwardsbandit8094]

"being punk rock is the thing that I personally like"

[@preparedfarmer]

@@backwardsbandit8094 another expert has logged on

[@rosshaworth5781]

I think the people you are looking for may just not be online. I think well rounded people exist and are are pushing boundaries they just aren’t doing it on KZbin.

[@difascio]

This, exactly. "It's not in my bubble and I don't know how to find it, therefore it doesn't exist". Real hot take.

[@hugogirardisking]

Agreed, I think this discourse and sensibility is out there offline, and I don't even think it's that impossible to find when you aren't just reading online comment sections.

[@pisstrap]

​@@difascio I like to call it "rick beato logic"

[@snowyetie8799]

Disagree, I’ve seen some boundary pushing shit on youtube

[@sobeso]

There is something Paradoxical in this video

[@peybak]

I agree.

[@PEBeaudoin]

especially that the link to his essay is to his Patreon subscription - LOL!

[@mitchellmcclain4483]

⁠@@PEBeaudoinHe’s not advertising or selling Patreon directly, it’s promoting his creation while indirectly supporting the medium to access it. Sharing or promoting a KZbin video you created through a link isn’t directly selling/advertising KZbin. The KZbin specific promotion (or buying into it) is secondary and voluntary as a result of being the medium, which isn’t comparable to any of the examples mentioned in this video

[@PEBeaudoin]

@@mitchellmcclain4483@mitchellmcclain4483 Yes, and I am not really in the position to complain - the videos here are first-class and offered to the world without paying - so finding a way to support the channel without selling out is necessary. Still, in the middle of talking bout "celebrities who sold out," it struck me as ironic to find a pitch to the essay. I would like to read it but not get locked in a subscription fee.

[@AdlerDavidson]

I liked the video but I kept getting McDonald's and ed Sheeran pop up ads lol

[@jackzhou2347]

Also why is the corporate world not included in your totality of humanity then? I think the purist view of art separate from any material conditions is naive. There won't be Michaelangelo without the Merdici family. It's the corporation (the editors/producers) that has gone soft and greedy. Artists rarely have that much say of what gets seen by the public.

[@mattgilbert7347]

Yeah they really lack an understanding of the material conditions that make art possible. Because of this lack, they end up ranting in a moralistic way. They just sound like Radlibs to me. Obsessed with dissent and orthodoxy.

[@balls261]

Yeah this is a really good point. So many artists shown in this video came from wealthy families or had connections that were really not a far cry from something like Kendrick Lamar and a fashion brand. Ironically that sort of hypocrisy is exactly what a lot of post modern art tries to deconstruct - however clumsy or bad it may sometimes be.

[@thatguykalem]

@@mattgilbert7347 I get the sense they haven’t spent a lot of time applying critical methods in their analysis.

[@grizz7714]

@@mattgilbert7347 This is delusional thinking. The creation and publication of artistics works are incredibily accesible nowadays. Do You genually think that making a movie today is harder than in the 70's or 80's?

[@mattgilbert7347]

@@grizz7714 wtf are you talking about? I don't think you understand what "material conditions" mean. I'm talking about economics. I'm talking about how people live, what they have to do in order to live.

[@JesseDanielSmith]

New title for the video “KZbinrs struggle to maintain momentum on rocky, grand proclamations”

[@applefritters5424]

I think there are some very important and relevant observations in this video, but I disagree with many of your conclusions. In your goals of seeking open mindedness and a fuller understanding of humanity through art, I find that you have a very restrictive and in fact PRESCRIPTIVE view of what that entails. You also seem to believe that you are fully enlightened to the complexities of art and the human experience. You are not. I am not. Nobody is. You can be open minded, learning and expanding your knowledge bases, but I think you need more humility and recognition of subjectivity in your approach. You have a very real point in the dismissal of art that people find offensive/personally disagree with, but that doesn’t mean that people should not examine and scrutinize the messages and sociopolitical context behind these works. You also neglect to acknowledge all the “punk” art that is still being created in every sector. It may seem like it isn’t there, but there are still so many impactful voices to find. Yes, the market is oversaturated; yes, capitalism corrupts; and yes, a lack of a collective culture/consciousness has resulted in a very bleak and muddled modern art landscape, but there is still so much meaning to find, and I think you should venture towards finding like minded people who continue to push boundaries and redefine “punk” for an increasingly postmodern era. Sorry if I misinterpreted any of your points, and i am open to further discussion, but as it stands these are my thoughts based on what I understood from the video. i am glad these conversations are being had :)

[@siriuslynow8226]

I think this is where I settled with the “Birth of a Nation” bit. The only thing I’ve heard about that film was that it was amazing from a technical standpoint and awful in the racist ideals it supported. What exactly was the essayist complaining about? That people note the second part when the discussion of the movie comes up…?

[@sebastienv7346]

I agree especially with your first point, because while it is important to be educated on past and current art to fully understand, his idea of people who "get it" doesn't really work for me. How much must be known in order to "get it"? Most of the things that I know and draw inspiration from are probably completely unknown to you and vice versa, but does that mean that neither of us understands the human experience? Is it only possible to create a good film if every technique and the person who created it is known? Is knowing Beethoven and The Weeknd enough?

[@orchidweaver99]

@@siriuslynow8226 I think less so that people note the second part, what I took from that segment was calling attention to how many people flat out disregard the value of it or in my own experience people that say it shouldn't even exist. I don't care about Birth of a Nation but I think the reactions to it can be an overblown refusal to engage or accept it for what it is

[@deus4329]

​@orchidweaver99 It caused the second revival of the KKK, it was shown in the White House. It was accepted until it wasn't.

[@fcpremix88]

Sorry but I could only make it through 23 minutes. I agree that people should be more open-minded to appreciate different sorts of art. I agree that people should be more open to feeling something and being vulnerable enough to allow someone else’s perspective to affect their own. I’d love it if everyone watched some David Lynch and actively wanted to *feel* instead of critique. But this video is the same tired argument I’ve seen before. When you’re using historical figures, it’s a cherry-picking of the ones who stood the test of time. There’s nonsense entertainment in every generation and in every medium of art. Everyone needs to take a deep breath. Good art is still being made. It’s up to us to be earnest. It’s up to us to encourage family and friends to try something new. It’s up to us to experience and/or create art.

[@TomSeliman99]

No it isn't. Art today is in its worst form. Quit justifying ugliness

[@decimusanothos5178]

@@TomSeliman99Beauty is a flaccid conclusion for any art movement. You want beauty? Go to nature. You want art? Find the ugly. Grow up.

[@user-ks8ux4ig6b]

I'm not sure the argument is that good art is not being made any more but that, in part, what is considered worthy art has gotten narrower. Since the late 80s funding for more experimental art has become more political - as if part of role of art is to help solve society's ills...

[@videoartistMC]

@@TomSeliman99 once you accept yourself a victim of the algorithm you will be able to slowly see the true art being made today, we may not have generational artists in the same way but to say art is in its worst form is ignorant at best

[@edennibeb5704]

​@@TomSeliman99if u acc believe this then ur j boring lol

[@hecthorns]

There is a component about class that I think is relevant in this conversation. Often you will see the upper middle class develop a half hearted or voyeuristic appreciation for the "low brow" entertainment; almost never engaging unless the subject gets co-opted and repackaged, instead they will more commonly observe the lower middle class participants as part of the spectacle itself. Whereas the "uneducated" lower middle class usually gets perceived as incapable of participating in the consumption and discussion of high art, getting dismissed by the former and even sometimes ostracized by their peers.

[@ManufacturingIntellect]

To add to this, high-art is also frequently segregated for the wealthy even when so many of them know so little of culture or the arts. They get expensive season tickets to the ballet and wouldn't be able to distinguish Schoenberg from Satie. They inherently don't understand what subversive art is until it becomes an expensive segregated commodity they can pay to see or pay to own. Meanwhile, the "uneducated proles" that have to save up for a single ticket to the ballet are creating the next generation of art and ironically they can't have meaningful discussions with wealthy patrons who may have more experience of high art but much less understanding.

[@giulyanoviniciussanssilva2947]

I'm impressed with the comments on this video. I was expecting the usual comments on this topic that I see on other channels, but here the conversation is advanced.

[@decimusanothos5178]

You won't find that represented here because our hosts are the figures mentioned in your first paragraph.

[@livioventura5061]

I mostly agree with the reasoning in this thread but as a middle class person sometimes it feels like I have to feel guilty just because I was born privileged and don't really know if I engage with stuff in a way that isn't patronizing or exploitative. I mean, just as people watch the higher classes from outside (and many do it with admiration or as escapism) I observe works by and about the underprivileged from an outside point of view and I'll feel whatever I feel partly because of my own lucky situation which I was born into without voluntarily exploiting anyone. So lately people automatically dismiss middle class people as condescending etc. but what am I actually doing wrong that I can do better?

[@ManufacturingIntellect]

@@livioventura5061 Maybe start by reading Marxist history and theory instead of using poverty art glorified by corporations as a way to feel better about your "lucky situation" in which you don't have to ever be educated about anything at all and can remain comfortable "without voluntarily exploiting anyone." Your perspective here clarifies your choice of acquiescence and senescence. You've already made the choice.

[@Plantichu]

I think that its really important to acknowledge that art doesnt exist in a vaccuum. Part of consuming art should be taking into account the intentions and opinions of the person that made it, as well as the message that they are sending with it. Who is the message empowering? What actions are they condemning for justifying? Art that holds up injustices with no nuance or critique can never or will never be "punk" regardless of what it is from a purely artistic point of view. SImilar to what others said, I dont care if a comedian crafts the perfect set up to a joke, or has incredible talent at telling a story in a comedic way, when a trans person is the butt of that joke, they are actively working to keep the status quo and make things worse for a marginalised group, which, ya know, is like the complete opposite of punk. I do think there is a place for "edgy" humor and art, but i think its really important to be critical of who is saying those edgy things, and what their ultimate intention is. The "im better than all of you because I can appreciate art for what it truly is rather than becoming enraged when it doesnt match up with my worldview" in my opinion is a bad faith argument that doesnt take into account the very real reprocussions for marginalised groups that some of this art promotes. Maybe ive interpreted the video completely incorrectly. Im a little confused on your definition of "punk" throughout the video so maybe that is where all this stems from. But I am interested in what other people think and the other aspects of this conversation that I probably havent considered.

[@ardenphanes]

Well because messaging matters. Specifically when you talk about works like "Birth of a Nation" you have to think not only about the boundaries it pushed but also what it stands for. Art is interpretation and engagement with it as much as it is what the artist put into it. Intention isn't everything, but if your art is glorifying racism then it's ok to not like it and avoid it for your own well being.

[@shaundixon5736]

Yeah, to ignore racism in birth of a nation and look at it only artistically but ignore art in Swift and only look at it as greed is a fucking insane argument. Theres a bit of sense here and your whole point is there’s no absolutes but weird choice of framing….

[@oliveribanescu1]

he specifically recognized the racism in Birth Of A Nation and only called out the people that can't see past that

[@shaundixon5736]

@ yes but in the same conversation refused to look past art in Taylor’s work and only see it as a sell out. My point is that’s a weird way to frame the world

[@BonerSexGaming]

he didnt say there was no art in taylor swifts actions. i believe he was referring to what she does outside of her music

[@oliveribanescu1]

@@shaundixon5736 I can understand your argument but not really agree as I find Taylor's work depraved of meaning or any form of self expression or intention of communicating anything on a deeper level. But this is just my opinion and can see why it can come out as hypocrite

[@RedFlowas]

Racism is not a capital sin. Birth of a nation has infinitely more merit as art than taylor swift.

[@kieranjarvis-brown990]

Big fan of your videos usually but... ...is it really transgressive, in 2025, to call Taylor Swift's music corporate slop? I struggle to understand who this video is for.

[@dai19721]

middle class people who are afraid to say the word....woke.

[@PsyX99]

​@@dai19721What is woke ?

[@joshuamelgar6251]

these are for the people who are the ultra conservative pearl clutchers but want to feel smarter by trying to play both sides

[@ouinelston7883]

Yeah the audience for this is very confusing. Maybe that’s the point? Idk. Whatever the case, it dosent work , and seems to be for people who thing this is a unique take

[@MrCowabungaa]

"Why are people becoming personally attacked by something, even if it does affect them?" Because not everyone has the luxury to let things slide. I think it's important to be empathetic towards those people who live under the spectre of demonization, whose safety or even lives are at increasing risk due to the social or even legal prosecution of their entire demographic. Take Birth Of A Nation for instance. Imagine being a black man in the southern US in the 1920's, a time when the threat of being lynched was ever present. Can you blame that person for not exactly caring for the artistic achievements of that film, considering it actively pushes to make his life worse? It's an extreme example, but you can see it as well with anti-trans comedians. Can you blame certain trans folks for getting upset over yet another popular comedian releasing an anti-trans set, fueling more hateful and degenerating comments towards their person during their day-to-day life? I don't think so. Art has power. If it hadn't, I think humanity wouldn't have put so much energy towards it throughout its entire history. I think it's important to be mindful of that power when it's wielded to hurt others.

[@foreverdirt1615]

The Birth of a Nation was a movie that resulted in many deaths and social disorder. It's a movie that, if it didn't exist, the world would have been a better place. And yet... I think classifying art as good or bad based on whether you agree with it is the wrong approach, and it's part of a much bigger psychosocial issue of people categorizing people as good or bad based on whether they agree with them. And from there, our problems get harder and harder to solve.

[@jinbesan]

Good comment and I'm glad other people are criticizing this video similarly.

[@crablegs.]

what an insane comparison. comparing a stand up comedy set to jim crow era sentiments.

[@Moonlight-mz7mu]

This is such a victim mindset comment

[@foreverdirt1615]

@@crablegs. It's not an insane comparison. I disagree with this person's comment too, but my comment has been hidden so you can't see it. Still, I think it's fine to compare the two if the point is the same.

[@EphemeralTao]

As someone who at one point in my life majored in "fine art" and art history, and has studied it off and on for more decades than I'd care to think about; the distinction between "high brow", "middle brow" and "low bro" art is one which is purely artificial; and I desperately want to see that distinction die a long-deserved and unlamented death. It serves nothing except elitism and exclusion as a tool of manipulative group dynamics, it says absolutely nothing about the qualities of the art itself. Worse, what we often think about as "high brow" art today absolutely _was not_ at the time it was created. Shakespeare is taught as "high brow" in most of modern western culture; but he was very much the Popular Culture of his time, and his plays are packed full of "low brow" humour and sensationalism. If Mozart was translated to modern culture, he would very much exist in the same vein as the Rock Star (albeit probably more on the prog rock side), both in his work and his lifestyle. So much of what is taught as "high brow" art of the past was also little more than blatant political and religious propaganda, or simply status-conscious and conspicuous displays of wealth and social standing. Indeed, the invention of the concept of "high brow" art itself was very much an attempt to create and maintain this class distinction, and preserve the social value of art as a display of wealth and status in a world where more and more people had access to the leisure time and resources necessary to become artists, and the wealth necessary to afford it. As far as something like "Birth of a Nation", that work and works like it (eg. "Triumph of the Will") were not "edgy" or "boundary pushing" or "punk" in any way whatsoever. Quite the opposite, they were and are _boundary-reinforcing_ . The entire ethos of punk was to challenge institutions of power, push back against the imposition of authority, champion the outcasts, and create alternatives to oppressive hierarchical culture. These works did not criticize power, they pandered to it, bowed before it, mythologized it, and championed it against the marginalized and outcast, against the real punks. John Waters rebelled against the institution of privilege and class stratification, and elevated the "low brow" as a big middle finger to the institutions of power he was raised to revere. D.W. Griffiths, by contrast, created a justification for those institutions of power to not only continue their oppression of the true "punk" fringes; but ultimately was a huge influence in expanding the oppression (for those who don't know, "Birth of a Nation" was one of the most powerful influences in resurrecting the KKK and metamorphosing it from a tiny society of racist goons, to one of the most potent political forces in the USA for decades afterwards). What's worse is that "Birth of a Nation" wasn't even good art. Griffith's propaganda film is credited with many innovations which it did not actually innovate. Nearly every "innovation" it's credited with was actually innovated by someone else well before it. Even what few techniques Griffith himself did invent, he did so in his short films long before he made "Birth of a Nation". Unfortunately, so many of the works where the real innovations occurred were lost or suppressed that it was easy for later critics and historians to credit them to someone who "borrowed" them from others. Not just in cinema, but art in general. It certainly didn't help that much of the miscredited work was created by people who were largely shut out of the mainstream art world -- women, black and indigenous people, queer people, and so on. This is the case for so many "innovations" in art credited to the socially privileged and wealthy, when those innovations already existed well before.

[@MrJMB122]

I wouldn't necessarily view religious art as propaganda. But it does get wrapped into the political culture, especially after the Imperial church. But it's more than anything to express the mixing of the immaterial with the material. The divine with the secular

[@EphemeralTao]

​@@MrJMB122 A great deal of European religious art is absolutely propaganda, especially during the various religious schisms, where each faction sought to promulgate their own particular worldview and religious authority through a medium accessible to even the most illiterate of the masses. During the so-called Baroque Period in particular, the Roman Catholic Church explicitly commissioned artists to create work emphasizing the doctrine and authority of the RCC, to serve the aims of the Counter-Reformation movement.

[@jackcade8790]

Mozart wasn't even particularly rockstar in lifestyle. He was a pretty chill wifeguy who moved to the suburbs for more room for his kids and pets. Mozart in todays world has multiple instagrams for his pets.

[@majoapaolaza7122]

Loved this video, made me think and consider things differently, but Promising young woman described as the danger of lonely men is wild. Because kind of the point of the movie is that is not just lonely men that hurt women. Is very much NOT about incels, is about never being able to tell witch man are the man that will abuse woman or cover for those who do. The movie shows man that are usually despicted in popular media as funny good guys and then show them as predators to show that these things are not mutually exclusive. Not only incels are abusive, not all abusers are this horrible idea of a monster lurking in the shadows, they are your friend or coworker, your partner, etc.

[@nodruj8681]

Literally the same thing could be said about women.. yet you lot act as if its one way.

[@majoapaolaza7122]

@nodruj8681 Im talking about a movie my dude. Go complain to the director, idc

[@gabrielgray2345]

​@nodruj8681 Men abuse women more statistically so... go cope somewhere else

[@NotMuchThanks]

Punk was the ultimate gimmick commodity sold to us. It defined itself by contrast, so it couldn't exist without the institutions it hated so much. But the resolution was, like the music, very much mediocre and infantile. A lot of empty shock value and irreverence and no trace of actual substance. In the end, punk was the fashion product sold to anybody who didn't want to wear a tie, an intrandescendent placebo for angry kids.

[@gregbors8364]

“You ain’t no punk, you punk!” - The Cramps, “Garbageman”

[@supernautcensus5689]

You wanna talka 'bout the real junk?

[@Dondillilochevrolet]

“I’m gay, I’m gay” - guy who wears makeup and pretends to be ‘dead’ and sings about ghouls

[@udonthavetorobme]

If I eEever said $#*% I'd be banned

[@supernautcensus5689]

@@udonthavetorobme 'Cause I'm a garbage man.... rrrrrRAAHRrrrrrrrr

[@wockyslush666]

YEAHHHHHH

[@kaydgaming]

You make me hate KZbin video essays, because they never meet the quality of ideas these videos often have. I disagree with you often, but the soul is so REAL

[@morganqorishchi8181]

It's so refreshing to see someone go, "I disagree with you but I can admit objectively to your work's quality." I see so, so little of that anymore. I feel like that kind maturity is dying out. Weird comment maybe but but I wish other KZbin comments had the quality of yours.

[@escarlit]

@@morganqorishchi8181 this thread is so punk rock

[@Shmyrk]

Roller coaster of emotion this is

[@Wreniffer]

exactly, i agree with the basic idea but how it got applied in the video, but its good art

[@Matty002]

​@@morganqorishchi8181 thats cause youtube prefers content that leads to retention and interaction, which is usually hate content, which people with empathy wont ignore for the sake of quality

[@Zvox]

people are making punk shit all over the internet every second of every day. open your fuckin eyes man.

[@mediatechjohn3088]

Isn't punk an attitude you exhibit in real life? My punk friends growing up were very obedient during covid.... I couldn't wrap my head around that

[@montesoul]

Yeah buddy is mad big budget mainstream slop isn't pushing the boundary enough lol

[@Wreniffer]

@@montesoulyeah thats why i got, i have the same problem with art but i blame it on mainstream culture and capitalism making people want to be easily seen.

[@Wreniffer]

@@mediatechjohn3088wdym obedient during covid?

[@younghegelian1]

@@mediatechjohn3088 if you accept the premise that people staying inside was neccessary for the sake of public health, then the punk thing to do is to stay inside

[@RocketBobsled]

Honestly? Couldn't disagree more. I'm pessimistic about nearly everything BUT the state of art for the extremely simple reason of the internet letting anyone make art, and anyone else find it. Be honest: Would you have ever seen Pink Flamingos if it wasn't for the internet? The freedom the internet has allowed has been overwhelming, nearly every medium being in a renaissance as every barrier to entry gets obliterated. From the expensive and often city specific barrier for high art like theater, to instagram allowing works of graffiti that only last days to live forever and continue to influence. Anyone can make a movie with their phone, a video game in their bedroom, and we've got a torrential flood of incredible independent art breaking rules that people weren't even aware of. Ironically given the title, punk is one of the best examples of art thriving with the internet. Even subgenres like Ska, once dead and well past their peak popularity, have seen a revival with a wildly active scene that. It drives me crazy to see the rapid boil of incredible independent local scenes that people ignore to complain about the mainstream. Of course its terrible! The job of mainstream culture is to satisfy the path of least resistance. There's never been more incredible works, you just have to work a little harder to find them. And you should, life changing art isn't something that gets handed to you, it's that obscure movie you only hear about from word of mouth, or that album you decide to give a random chance to over the album art. What's left is the 'media literacy' complaint. Which, lamenting that people are "bad at watching movies" to me feels like the only way to fail a Rorschach test.

[@CeeLoGreen666]

that barrier of entry being broken means anyone and everyone can "be" "an artist" just look at catatonic youths. they collect all of these droolers who think they should be the next big thing. idk, kind of like what he was saying, theres a lot more nuance than it seems

[@UnvisibleINK]

That's what taking things on face value does to you. You see barriers of entry being broken but think not of the tidal wave of mediocrity thats to follow and what the longterm consequences will be. I agree that taking influence away from academics, snobs and rich collectors should be a net positive... but competing against erotic fan art of Sonic The Hedgehog, or low effort kids media is just a new kind of hell for artists to endure. Online metrics where number goes up and all can see it, makes conformity and trend chasing, and pandering to popular expectations easier and more expected than ever. Also, what's with the assumption that people need the internet to discover John Waters? He made stuff that was mainstream accessible like Cry Baby and Hairspray, Hairspray even got a remake with John Travolta and a Broadway show. As for his edgy stuff, I first saw Pink Flamingoes around 2010, it was a VHS copy from a friend's big sister's video collection. Also watched Female Trouble and a couple of Andy Warhol movies that night. When you're not a square, and not from a square family, and don't have square friends, you don't need the internet to discover cool stuff. Which is why and how John Waters rose to prominence before the internet and became one of the most celebrated cult cinema auteurs. People used to identify with what they liked, but mass media and social media encourage people to like things based on how the wish to identify. Also if you're optimistic about the general state of contemporary art then I question how much art you're actually engaging with. This seems like one of those Dunning-Kruger moments.

[@xavierallsaints]

breath of fresh air is a young persons mind

[@joshandrus]

@@RocketBobsled thinking no one could know about Pink Flamingos without the internet is a weird thing to say.

[@foreverdirt1615]

@@joshandrus Ugh. Yes obviously people knew about Pink Flamingos before the internet but the point he was making was that you have way more opportunities to expose you to things you wouldn't have otherwise known about with the internet, and that people, contrary to popular belief, actually do take advantage of those opportunities very frequently, producing a population that has far more broad awareness of different kinds of culture. Of course, the basic normies who wouldn't have been interested in Pink Flamingos anyway still won't know or care about it, but the people who want to find that stuff have a much easier time these days, and it pays off.

[@cabaretdejinx8229]

The nuanced folk who are capable of traversing the arts, appreciating the spectrum of the creative world, the so called punks, we’re out here, we just don’t live online or post on social media (very often).

[@smallsignals]

Telling people they're not a complete human being if they don't do things your way is a bit dehumanising. And strangely, seems to be the opposite of what you're arguing for.

[@jossua7524]

What is dehumaning is selling our soul

[@alanamarko]

the whole video is like this. pompous and holier-than-thou.

[@smallsignals]

@@jossua7524 Could you define that for me? In your estimation, and in the way you see it relating to the video? Just so I have a bit more context.

[@jossua7524]

@@smallsignals Art is one of the only things in this world that still allows itself to have no other goal than to be able to express itself freely, far from any notion of productivity, profit, image or politeness. Art exists because it is a fundamental need. It's one of the only things we might have left that isn't completely corrupted by capitalism if artists keep their integrity and humanity.

[@smallsignals]

@@jossua7524 I don't think that humans have ever had complete freedom. I think that's an inaccurate view of the relationship between art and commerce. But you haven't answered my question. Define what you mean by 'selling out'?

[@jasonjerusalem]

I don't get it 27:58 you're asking "why being offended? Just be a human!" 34:50 you're offended by celebrities selling themselves, which is such a human thing to do.

[@sebastienv7346]

I agree with the first one but don't you get frustrated when someone you like is trying to sell you a product? If youre saying that the search for wealth is human nature i understand that, but I believe that artists who've already become sucessfull and continue to promote products for a paycheck are greedy and need to be called out on it.

[@anima6035]

He also called getting offended at those celebrities low hanging fruit. Regardless , imho, It's ok to be offended but being offended isn't a reason to completely shut down conversation and pretend something doesn't exist.

[@ekbergiw]

It definitely isn't Punk Rock to take certain sponsorships.

[@boysvsgirls_music]

He missed the mark entirely in the second half of this video. There are way more nuances to the music industry itself and the way things are set up where artists feel the need to do commercials. The second half was the KZbinr admitting to his own tribalism that he spent the first half criticizing. Punk is not about a specific look, sound, etc. punk at its core is about being yourself and doing what you genuinely want to do. Good video overall but definitely lacks a great deal of nuance and contextualization on the art industry

[@leticiapereira3186]

How is selling something you don’t care about for money punk though? Don’t we all want to represent something we agree with? Why would someone advertise Dunkin’ Donuts over a small independent coffee shop they love and the barista knows their name and order? Whatever corporate industry you’re talking about is corrupting the very thing this video stands for

[@balls261]

To be fair though, if you make music heavily criticizing corporations and how hollow the industry is and then go and do corporate tie ins, commercials, and feature on big empty pop songs, that does make you a hypocrite.

[@terminaldeity]

Hardcore punk is about rejection of aesthetics and cultural commodification.

[@orphan_obliterator7778]

I fully agree with you, but I feel like I cannot put my sentiment into words myself. Would you perhaps care to expand on your take? I would greatly appreciate that

[@handsomeboi3767]

Are incels punk?

[@erso3302]

As a kid, punk was just a middle finger to "The Man." As an adult, I've come to realize it was the voice of "truth" no one wanted to hear. Except, sometimes it's wrong. Sometimes, it's so obviously wrong as to be laughable.

[@amiraethervalen]

I don't comment a lot on videos, but I feel like I just had to on this because it feels like it just burrowed so deep into my brain and extracted so many things from my subconscious that I needed to say but didn't know how to express, or who to express it to. I had goosebumps from beginning to end because of how much so much of what's said here resonated. Of course, the more authentic you are, the more passionate you can be, but the less you're going to resonate with everyone - especially those not ready or willing to truly listen. And that's ok. Listening to this felt like a mental shift that I needed, but didn't even know that I needed. I was around since the early days of Channel Criswell, then absolutely loved the evolution in style through The Cinema Cartography, and now cannot wait to see what's next with The House of Tabula.

[@capabartz7380]

When I was in high school I had these ideas in my head that art functioned within strict hierarchies. That within each artform there was the good art and the bad art (very similar to the hierarchy you drew up dividing high art and low art). For example within music I thought of pop and rap as low art and classic and jazz as high art (this was also definitely impacted by the fact I was white and didn’t understand my own biases). My reasoning for that thinking came from my own experience with music, I played instruments for years, and because of that I held virtuosic playing as the prime reason a song was good. And as I listened to more music I started to get confused by the fact that I enjoyed some simple pop or rock songs more than really intense jazz songs. I would struggle as well with the fact that I felt like I ought to hold really impressive jazz or classical music to a higher degree than really impressive rock music. And I couldn’t get past those issues. I would come up with some many roundabout ideas to reason with those ideas. And honestly I couldn’t get past that way of thinking until I started writing my own music. I would write a song that I really liked and was proud of and it was more of a pop song than a jazz tune and I had to really face down those ideas. I had to ask myself if the jazz song I tried to write and sounded terrible was better than the simple pop song I wrote and liked. And obviously I realized that those hierarchies are bullshit. And I think they come from people struggling to understand the intricacies of making art, and in order to dumb those intricacies down people start thinking of art as a sport. That the more you have to study and a practice the better art is. But that isn’t true. So much great art was made in a day or in an hour, it was made by accident, by someone who didn’t fully know what they were doing. And that doesn’t mean the art is worth any less.

[@damonwaian9972]

Most working class people don't have time to delve too deep into art. That does not mean they aren't thoughtful, curious or inspired by art. A more material analysis is needed here.

[@amethystinalaccari]

Your ideas are outdated

[@doodly1152]

​@@amethystinalaccari you seem out of touch with working class people.

[@tahsina.c]

Yes we do, piss off. Some of us have a lot of time, especially as children. Our art doesnt matter and struggles to find an audience.

[@sagma2102]

I think art being subjective is such a double edged sword. And this video and it's comments have very much solidified that. It's very paradoxical in nature, as is being punk. I think the movie, Trainspotting definitely dwells in that dilemma more than I care to type in a youtube comment, at least my interpretation of it.

[@DannyRndm]

35:40 Bad Brains (on cassette in my, not Sony, three button Walkman) and my skateboard. What a time to be alive. This video is my introduction to your channel. You've just gained a subscriber

[@sithofdarkness8927]

A bit too centrist of a take but I appreciate where it's from. A desire to seek art in the soulfulness of any piece from triptychs to pink flamingos. I understand a desire to see the artfulness of Birth of a Nation or the works of Riefenstahl, but I believe there must be a space to criticize the messaging and the techniques of what the pieces do or implore the viewer to do (intentionally or not) with its existence. They are not passive or neutral. They are worthy of examination, to be called art even, but blanketly is too blasé, too flippant and egoistic a lens of letting art just exist when there are important lines to draw between introspective inducing works and filth that is damaging to people, like art the necessitates murder in its craft or propaganda for self destructive death cults (including fascists).

[@aqwthetroop]

While I think this is better than the "Degeneracy" video, I still dislike this video because it encourages a broader understanding of the human experience without actually questioning the status quo; a spirit that punk is supposed to embody. I don't think it's enough to flatten the medium hierarchy if you're going to retain an internal hierarchy within each medium, because that means you're still engaging with art as a matter of its seriousness and its ability to elicit emotional experiences within an acceptable range of expression. For example, you would be offended at the thought of graffiti and oil paintings being "innately as good as one another." Why? These are two mediums for artistic expression, there is no real reason why one should hold any innate value over the other besides a set of cognitive biases that stem from a broader cultural context in which both mediums are used, and the point of punk is to challenge that notion; I'd argue we should extend this challenging of commonly held norms to all areas of culture and art. I also don't think it's OK when you apply a sense of edge towards marginalized groups because you're not actually being transgressive, you're just attacking a group that can't defend itself. If you're going to transgress social norms, do it to attack large institutions or systems of power that can meaningfully impact the every day lives of individuals. Attack cultural norms, ones that we take for granted but that don't hold any real value and actively harm people. To take a page from your playbook, if you're taking an artistic risk and putting yourself out there for the potential critique and ire of others, and what you have to offer is an attack on people below you on the social and economic hierarchy, then your soul is fucked up and I hope you can find it again. I agree with some elements of the video, I think the current landscape of artistic expression is far too commercialized, we should try to learn about particular problems or subcultures before we're able to fully talk about them in our own art, and I dislike the all-or-nothing approach of discourse. I wish the critique went beyond this nebulous attack on "society these days" and actually questioned the material conditions that have led us to where we are today. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the message of this video, but it feels elitist while trying to communicate the opposite message because it refuses to challenge neither the structure of what we find good or bad, nor does it discuss the "why" behind the way things are. Instead this video seems to exist in a bubble where the creator can signal to us how personally enriched and above-it-all they are while providing no solution to the problem they see. Which is a shame, because I do enjoy the media critiques they otherwise release.

[@ryanporterhouse]

🙏🙏🙏 My thoughts exactly. I would love to hear the channel engage with this critique. It’s not like they’ve never criticized capitalism before, so I’m surprised there is no acknowledgment of material conditions in this thesis. Not to mention there’s still plenty of great, boundary-pushing comedy these days. Some of it is still edgy, some by the books, some is more empathetic or includes post-modern critique (weird of them to love Joker 2 but not comedy that does this), and some of it is just new and weird in ways I find exciting and cool. I feel like they’re just not looking for this stuff. I really don’t understand them wanting things to be “punk” and “new” while simultaneously complaining that “they don’t make em like they used to.”

[@heartsalas1044]

Yeah, I also agree with you. There are some portions in the video where I tend to lean on disagreement. As if anybody has the stomach to experience abrasive or degenerate art, but I still believe that there are people who experienced it to some degree, have the right to express their opinion about it no matter what positions in life they are in. However, I still believe that this kind of art should be available to those who are looking for it, want to experience it, or if the artist wishes to (if they are alive somehow). In addition, if it is human to make degenerative art, and express our messy side, don't you think that it is also human to have some kind of reaction coming from it, whether it may be nonchalance, disgust, arousal, or whatever... I also wanted to add that if some people who experienced an art piece and found it too shitty for their taste, I still think they should still be allowed to express it. Anyway, this comment somehow helps me verbalize my thoughts and uneasiness as I watch the video in full. The KZbinr kinda sound like a hopeless punk thinking the subculture was gone. Punk's not dead, he just does not know where to look.

[@lunchbergeron3434]

If I had to refute this and give what I think the thesis of the video is (and it isn't very clear to be fair), it's this: If it's not transgressive, if it's "safe" art, it's not punk, and "punk" has become an aesthetic co-opted by the establish and passed off for the real thing whereas the real "punk", the truly transgressive, is suffers. I'm going to try to explain what I mean and you may find it offensive, but bear with me. Your point about it not being ok to be edgy towards marginalized people: I think it's similarly problematic to suggest they can't defend themselves or take a joke. The concepts of privilege, class consciousness, the many shortcomings of capitalism, etc, were all ideas once carried by the punk movement, but now have been championed pretty thoroughly by a lot of mainstream art in the last 20 years. Good! Many people saw the work of these punks and saw how marginalized people came to be marginalized via these processes and these ideas, which were once relegated to people on the political fringe, became much closer to the mainstream. I recall watching an analysis of Rian Johnson's knives out as an allegory for American politics, and how Marta, a lower class Latina who is treated poorly by the rich family she works for, is framed for murder and manipulated by one of the family members who comes off as an outsider trying to help her but is really just looking to use her for his own ends (a trump allegory). An important trait about marta is that she can't lie without getting so nervous she vomits. Two things came to my mind watching that: 1. If this is meant to be a political allegory, the way marta is portrayed is dehumanizing. 2. Rian Johnson is a rich white male who makes hollywood movies. There is a cost to recognizing that people are shaped by systemic privilege/oppression, which is to start forming the cognitive bias that people are ONLY shaped by systemic privilege/oppression. The end point of this line of thinking begins to make people who, if privileged, begin to compete with other privileged people to see who can self-flagellate the most, and become the noblest, without actually recognizing that this doesn't help marginalized people and actually makes a lot of them uncomfortable. On the other side of that, marginalized people may also use this line of thinking to justify harmful actions and give others pause from calling them out when it would be justified. I think most would agree that every human has the ability to be racist, but it's a lot more uncomfortable to make jokes about black racism against asian people during Covid than it is to make a joke about white privilege, even though both need to be called out. This is just one argument about one topic in a sea of things that could be discussed. What punk really is to me is an embrace of the rough edges of human nature. I kind of agree with you at least on class, and that it's a bit laughable for a punk to be rich. That's why, when you see popular culture start to adopt what punk used to be, it's essential to ask what's really going on here. Art to me is a humanist movement, and punk is one that uses the whole human, especially the ugly parts. No, dunking on minorities is not punk. racism is a phenomenon that seeks to gain power at the expense of other people, and I don't think that's very punk. But an overwhelming fear of discussing race in any way that's not completely positive is counterproductive. Punks are outcasts, considered vulgar and profane by the establishment, who nerveless expose that same vulgarity in the establishment. They say, "remember that you're not better than me". If you agree with the politics of major media companies, that's fine, there's probably a good reason those ideas became so popular, but they're not punk anymore.

[@TomSeliman99]

Punk only pushes the boundaries of making things more ugly

[@aqwthetroop]

@@lunchbergeron3434 I agree with your comment, and maybe I worded it a bit poorly, but I was referring more on a systemic level. For example, conservatives hold all three branches of government and can hand waive away the right to gay marriage if they want to. A comedian using the f-slur doesn't directly affect the rights of gay people, but they normalize harmful beliefs that are already ingrained in public consciousness, and that calling out this behavior is often an uphill battle and met with people thinking they're overreacting. It's more what I referred to when I said these groups "can't defend themselves." One common phrase you may hear in black communities for this phenomenon is "working twice as hard for half as much." Maybe that's a better way to put it. I think any meaningful intersectional analysis should include the individual component, but I wouldn't over-emphasize it because any sociological discussion must take into account material conditions first and foremost when trying to discuss solutions. I don't want to run away with the discussion, as I feel it's a bit complex for a YT comments back and forth, but sufficed to say worrying about individual differences is a roadblock to meaningful policy changes.

[@mvonballmo]

"People miss out on so many things, they don't know they don't know." Kudos; brilliant essay.

[@TheGhostOfFredZeppelin]

Also ironic since the creator of the video apparently missed out on the fact that punk is still alive and well, he just chooses to not see it

[@merzbau]

"Art is the conversation between lovers. Art offers an opening for the heart. True art makes the divine silence in the soul break into applause." Hafez This is one of my favorite definitions of art. A nice counterpoint to this current and shallow notion that the function of art is to botter, disturb, push boundaries, etc.

[@thedarkcranberry]

Native #1: "White man been here." Native #2: "How do you know?" Native #1: "Video essay."

[@ritarocha7280]

high brow comment

[@snowyetie8799]

Him: if you ask someone to tell a joke…blablabla Me: *shows this comment* ART BITCH

[@gabrielgray2345]

​@nodruj8681Dude... stfu with you colonialist bullshit. Like white people have raped and pillaged all throughout European history

[@alanamarko]

i cannot believe i watched 46 minutes of this for the point to be this vapid to the point that i'm not even sure there is a point here. videos like this are a big part of why i fucking hate youtube. all talk and condescension with nothing of actual value to say.

[@foreverdirt1615]

It's ironic that this video kind of seems to embody everything that it is preaching against.

[@R_S747]

Agreed

[@orphan_obliterator7778]

I fully agree with you, but I feel like I cannot put my sentiment into words myself. Would you perhaps care to expand on your take? I would greatly appreciate that

[@grizz7714]

@@foreverdirt1615 What tf do You think He is criticizing?

[@foreverdirt1615]

@@grizz7714 it's so all over the place and unfocused that it's hard to tell at times, but he seems to have a vague general frustration over commercialism and mediocrity, which is ironic because this video is utterly mediocre and lacks any depth. He seems to have a hard-on for this idea of "punk" as basically the Sigma art mind, but then he takes pot shots at other works that he doesn't understand when he doesn't consider them "punk" enough, which ironically is a pretty square thing to do.

[@AlbertKarhuFilms]

it is a beautiful thing to be able to disagree with someone in perfect harmony. everything and everyone is different and that is what makes life so beautiful.

[@learnt2love]

=0

[@neolordie]

Being so detached to the subject you're discussing is a privilege in itself, some people can't afford the luxury to not care

[@AlbertKarhuFilms]

@@neolordie I am not sure if I understand what you are saying? Or maybe you understood me wrong? btw. my comment was meant as a reply for another comment but apparently my yotube skills suck almost as much as my English does.

[@ekbergiw]

I think you've touched on an interesting point. Some differences are genuinely valuable, and nurturing differences, or fringe lifestyles, can form a bulwark to safeguard our individual liberties; even fostering innovation. On the other hand, a great degree of similarity can lead to great collective action and power. Some degree of unity will always be necessary to reap the rewards of past liberties. Unfortunately, Unity and diversity are occasionally parasitic. IRL the rewards of unity may entice the heal, and similarly the call of the wild may bring out the beast in all of us. The championship of either "unity" or "diversity" in and of themselves is therefore misguided as individual circumstances dictate the correct course of action in a democratic consensus and paradoxically the decision of an individual autocrat may provide better outcomes for the mob.

[@DanielBurtonDidYourWife]

I loved this essay to death but I'm puzzled by the notion that A Promising Young Woman was trying criticize "incels" or "ailenated men" rather than taking a hammer to men who already hold power in society and are seemingly well adjusted. That's why the main antagonist at the end is a frat bro.

[@Easyyy7]

happy ten years, been a fan of your content for how long i can remember, but i know for certain that my sheer boredom during covid pandemic led me to your content and other channels that sparks my interests in those depressing times.

[@ihspan6892]

Pink Flamingos are absolutely fantastic! Not because for their own sake, but because of the broader context in which they were created. And I spent 2 years studying Flemish paintings of late middle ages at the university with one of the best specialists in the world. I am very happy you put together the polyptych and J. Walker's film. Great video! Thanks you!

[@shizzlecakes]

I really hate internet think pieces about punk. I spent my entire teenage life invested into listening to and knowing about punk and this type of take always came from people trying to intellectualize punk to hold it over other peoples heads. I never liked a lot of people who called themselves punks because of this.

[@Moonlight-mz7mu]

This is literally punk, idk wtf you’re going on about but this punk is a million times more authentic and powerful than the degenerate “punks” people traditionally think about who only cared about sex, drugs, degeneracy

[@malal6512]

your not punk.

[@RedFlowas]

@@malal6512you are Indian

[@bigcheese2128]

Fucking exactly. Punk is getting out there and doing shit yourself in spite of political and socioeconomic systems which may get in your way. Punk is hauling a generator to play a free show in a storm drain or someone’s house simply for the sake of enabling people to display their art. Punk is transgressive and revolutionary, it’s not for aloof rich kids to make thinkpieces and video essays about, or for edgelords with no sincere values to use as an aesthetic for their toxic and shitty behavior. It’s an idea that’s almost completely foreign to the content mill of social media, but it exists in REAL LIFE

[@snowyetie8799]

Im sorry to say but anti intellectualism isn’t the definition of punk either bud. This guy IS kinda enoying and preachy, but when he’s talking about « punk » hes not talking about the music scene, hes talking about the cultural movement. Hes talking about braking boundaries and being comfortable with the uncomfortable

[@xoagig]

your problem is that you have become an image purist, you see in the "artist" a "must be incorruptible" superhero who never existed in history, bc we are human, this is the classic "delusional fascist crisis", where everything should follow specific rules and if you are not getting any closer ..you are a sell-out in this case not Punk enough ... it doesn't matter you have a bill to pay or problem, you must put your Artist skills first.. bc you are objectified and glorified by the people and they need you to be real ..not human...

[@burntcorpse7971]

An add poped up when you mentioned declining sponsorship from surfshark and I think it actually added to the video because of the irony. Great video I am Subscribed now.

[@AirplayDoc]

Thank you for making this. I think this has more to do with the fact that we no longer share a common culture. We have all been atomized into different demographics. Each one is catered to in their own individualized silos. Nothing is transgressive anymore because nobody can agree what is sacred.

[@drewwiltsey7748]

Best thing I've seen in years. You grounded me in way I can never express, artistically. Jan van Eyck is very important to me. As is Punk culture. Thank you.

[@JG-tr4bn]

It's funny how the KZbin ad rolls hit right as the video reaches a fever pitch of criticizing advertisements

[@CinnamonGrrlErin1]

I've always approached cinema the way Andrew Zimmern approaches food: boldly and with an open mind, and I think that philosophy has really benefited me these last 30 years.

[@learnt2love]

sick sad world!

[@CinnamonGrrlErin1]

​@learnt2love la la LA la la!!

[@Nobodyslittlebirb]

Ah yes, another wonderful video on why the haters hating my hating are wrong.

[@AbandonedProject3]

yikes, not sure glorifying comedians and other artists who punch down on those who are marginalized is very punk. Call me naive or close minded, but it's just as punk to be kind as it is to live on the fringe of what society deems consumable and easy to digest. You can do both simultaneously. It is important to take in and try your best to understand a plethora of perspectives, which I think was the main goal of this essay, but wasn't articulated very well in my opinion. To say one is less enlightened because they refuse to support or engage with art/artists (especially capitalist hound millionaire artists who absolutely do not give a shit about you) that are openly antisemitic, misogynistic, or all around hateful (both explicitly and implicitly), is just pretentious and careless to communities that they harm. Oh boy, I hope I don't need to flash my punk ID card in order to be let into the subculture/ideology/aesthetic, and to consume art with intent and purpose. I left mine at home on accident!

[@californiaraisins8532]

Stop crying.

[@gypsylips1950]

Brainlet response. Spending too much time on tik tok cant even be bothered to type more than 2 words ​@@californiaraisins8532

[@MCUnknownGotBars]

Glad I stumbled across your channel. I’ve Been battling with this very thing in my life lately Full time musician/songwriter here. For the last 5 years. I detest the Industry that surrounds my passion. I hate every god damn song is a single and sounds like long un-skippable advertisement for things idgaf about.

[@ideologybot4592]

"It appears to me that these broad brush strokes are emerging due to some innate fear of poeple committing to challenging their views." Well at least you got the wrong part right out in the beginning. You're talking about commitment as an intellectual project, and the vast majority of people do not identify as intellectuals. They never have been. They might say open-mindedness is a good thing, but ultimately, there is no inherent goodness in exposing everything they believe to constant attack of perspective until it changes. You're talking about artistic endeavor as the binding purpose of society, and that's not what it is. For most people, commitment is to an identity. It's who they choose to consistently be. It can be role, faith, ethic, attitude, perception in style, you name it. Anything that people think has value and will have value, they invest themselves in. And when they do, when they make that commitment, they express it, and their social worth becomes attached to it. Of course they take it seriously, that's no tragedy. This isn't about mindless acceptance. It's about an incentive structure, and a necessary one, because it would be a weird kind of self-loathing to dedicate yourself to being a person or part of a group or tradition that garners no respect. They want to see their values shared. They don't want to have to constantly question or recalculate their point of view. You'd know this if you had ever been through a major values reorientation: trust me, it SUCKS. Most people avoid it. So people don't buy what pisses them off. They ignore it. And thus, fewer people sell it. And what you call punk is now a niche again, as it has been for most of history. Rebellion is not edgy, most of it's mainstream now within some wider part of the culture. Tribalism and commodification and mediocrity are just ancillary to this. People are just seeking a return on their attention invested. Not everyone has pretentions to take in every perspective on earth. The vast majority of people, whether they admit it or not, will limit their horizons by necessity, because there's only so much attention to allocate and they have insecurities that can be exploited, and they know some internal chaos can happen even if what they value isn't totally destroyed, even if others sympathize. They'd rather have a comfortable half-certainty than pity, and they can go without someone constantly trying to prod them into a crisis of meaning. Strong beliefs are dangerous, but so is everything that matters. Self-preservation isn't cowardice when there's nothing to gain, and their soul isn't f***ed up. Every artist should get this. But artists have been against this in the modern era, which is why artists have been a weird little subculture, subsidized by the bourgois while somewhat relegated to pockets of urbania for the last couple centuries. They too have a cultural identity they've committed to, and it's the identity that rejects all identity permanence, that sees ideas as temporary things they try on, and their affections for ideas are like fashions of their time, as they work within an attention economy and they expose each other to those ideas in waves of interpersonal connection. This isn't inherently bad, but it could be inherently shallow, too focused on feeling, decadent, and it certainly doesn't give any respect for the commitments of, say, experts who dedicate years to a trade or craft or profession, making sacrifices on the way, not to say those who practice a faith or get involved in politics or dedicate themselves to a family. There's nothing more foolishly consumerist than saying all lifestyle choices are equal. Your defining of punk is entirely yours and this overarching credit you give it is not well placed. Punk is an inherently anti-institutional approach, and by no means always precocious outsider art. You don't acknowledge that the punks, with their nihilism, have been using art for attacking institutions and perspectives, often unfairly, for decades. This whole thing about how people shouldn't take it personally... ridiculous. It's childish, like the political internet trolls who hold their fingers in front of people's noses and say "I'm not touching you". Of course it's personal. Of course they're being attacked. Even if they don't fully understand the intricacies of their own belief, they can feel it. Ordinary people used to put up with it on principle of decency, which emboldened the punks, who were absolutely seeking change they believe in at cost to what others believe in. Their constant undermining of accepted values already manufactured cynicism, and the recent generations on all sides decided they would rather have sincerity. This requires caring about something, and that creates the vulnerable attachments I'm talking about. That's why there's a culture war. I expect you would like to handwave it and say that no one's reputation or invested identity is at risk because of their exposure to ideas, but that's simply wrong. No one likes getting pummeled, and constantly seeing others take the piss out of something you find respectable or even sacred is a beating. It undermines your investment, and your status, and yes, this absolutely means that people are not equal and they don't want to be, artists included. We are our ideas. It's a power game, like it or not. Nietzsche, who sought art and accepted brutality in equal measure, was completely right about the nature of the thing. There are infinite people scrambling for attention in this media zeitgeist we live in. Virtuosity or not, no one owes open-mindedness to anyone.

[@jonathanb.814]

Don’t we all owe open-mindedness to ourselves? Like you said, we all commit to something. Which do you want to commit yourself to: (1) a safe, corporatized categorization that reduces art to high/low, us/them, red/blue, or (2) an open-mindedness that is not afraid to explore or appreciate what’s both inside and outside your comfort zone? Being open minded doesn’t have to come at the expense of our core values, but having those values challenged is the price of admission when trying anything new (not just art), and we need to be willing to re-examine or defend them when we explore. I can appreciate your point that most people will choose to avoid this; exploration is time consuming and exhausting. It is easier to just be entertained and I agree with you that many are too attached to the ideas they’ve invested in creating themselves. But exploration is necessary to grow and find our own authenticity. When the internet and its algorithms are constantly trying to manipulate us for someone else’s profit, authenticity is the antidote. This video essay words its arguments in a very emotional way because he’s venting and it has some tangential rants that drift off-target, but I think that’s the point he’s trying to make.

[@senzation01]

Bro wrote a better comment than the entire video

[@ideologybot4592]

@@jonathanb.814 On the idea that art has a utility in re-examining and that this creates personal growth, I agree. I did not mean to imply that people shouldn't grow or be fundamentally close-minded all the time. We all have our own balance on that. But I don't fetishize art for art's sake, either. There are plenty of pigeonholes that aren't corporatized, that aren't safe, and that reward personal investment and create relationships and perspectives that reward a person who buys in over years or an entire life. Commitment can be as healthy as broadmindedness, while authenticity can be a chimera people chase without conscience. The relationship between individual and culture is never clean. I've been where OP is, and I hope he finds his balance, too.

[@mattsipe8963]

I feel like another part of being literate in any form of media is to be able to read criticism, or even just observations on how a piece reflects views of the time it was released, or much later, and not think of it as a teardown piece, or moralizing something so "pure" as art. it's usually just an observation in my experience. it may be shocking enough to one person to stay away from the media altogether, but that's their prerogative. The only people I see making teardowns, or hit pieces, are people on twitter or reddit. punk feels dead because punk is outside. People aren't as stupid as the internet or our leaders would lead you to believe. If you want to fight someone, fight the person waving money in front of your face so they can make your decisions and opinions for you. Fight anything other than your fellow man.

[@sobeso]

There are multiple paradoxes in this video

[@alicewright4322]

it feels like nothing is punk because >=middle class people emulate and appropriate everything so quickly that the real thing is plastered over with a facade of itself before anyone can see it. the same is true with 3:00. people still enjoy things. the very vocal and very annoying people on youtube don't and they shout over all the real people.

[@EphemeralTao]

There's an excellent book on the subject of appropriation and commodification of culture, "The Society of the Spectacle" by Guy Debord, himself a French artist.

[@Andrew-of8uq]

How is this the middle classes fault and not the rich?

[@PsyX99]

​​​@@Andrew-of8uqIts too hard to say "capitalism" for some people. Cause you know once its said it's about what you are now. And in the US in particular people have been brained washed about socialism (also many people saying this are probably themselves "middle class" and profit from capitalism in ways that makes alternatives scary). My 2c on this.

[@EgoTherapieLee]

*symbolism, mate. also: -Bill hicks made money from his performances. -Marilyn Manson is rich as f00k. -Advertisment using images has been here for hundreds of years -not every artists is a celebrity. look around you, go see some local bands, ask your friend wo always was into painting.. etc Punk has always been dead.

[@jesterdays]

Wow, you're really onto nothing here.

[@intellectually_lazy]

you can't control how your audience consumes your art or what conclusions they draw from it once you've created it and put it into the world. it belongs to everyone then

[@movimentodoscacos]

that also doesn't mean that audiences aren't often dumb and annoying and nowadays many can't seem to engage honestly with the art they supposedly love

[@Poisonthroat]

@@movimentodoscacosyou aren’t allowed to be too educated on any subject today without being called a nerd or elitist. Online teenagers have become insane self conscious bullies

[@intellectually_lazy]

what's with all the now a days talk? these things are always true, and i don't really care about the opinions of anyone who thinks i'm too educated. i think. i know that's inconvenient, but that's freakin' tough!

[@vujsa]

Here's a thought, though: art is not that important. Maybe what you perceive as people not having "the edge" or getting "it" any more, is just us finally realizing that not only consumerism and shitty/numbing/evil consumerist art, but also art as such is not to be adored and adhered to as ardently as we have become accustomed to doing in the past 100 years. Unlike your video, the world did not start with Renaissance, nor did humanity achieve its full potential in van Eyck or punk or Sontag or Tarkovsky or Waters or all of those who do "get it" combined. Human life does exist and does have a purpose even without art. Beauty exists without art. Strong feelings do as well. Here's another: even absorbing the fullness of human experience, which would presumably be the ideal purpose of art, is not the ultimate goal or necessarily the right path. It can be useful for some, but it's not the only way for "traversing" this life. We were told who the Way is, but we still prefer to pretend that we need to figure it out on our own. It is narrow-minded to be surprised at others holding values above art and subjecting art, together with every other human activity, to those values. Finally, championing "humanity's totality" can easily turn into substituting breadth for depth. It also disregards the very real propensity that us humans have for, inadvertently or otherwise, veering way off any virtuous or meaningful course. In other words, the old phrase "nihil humani a me alienum puto" is not the whole picture. We do live in a fallen and broken world, and it's perfectly natural that we deem certain things (or deeds, or artistic expressions) abhorrent, harmful and ontologically impermissible. A remedy for the state in which people "don't know that they don't know" about the abject content is not to encourage them to know it, but to advise them to stay clear of it. Knowing that you don't know the bottom of it, and knowing perfectly well that it may well be bottomless, is just the right measure of involvement. There's no need for anybody to be plunging into the abyss of extremity.

[@QualityCandor]

One of the best reads of it here, and something a lot of people need to hear more often. Hell, something I need to hear more of from time to time. There's something to be said about art as understanding the human condition, but there's also something to be said for just living it. It's why I don't take photos everywhere I go. Sometimes, it's just being in the world and really engaging with it, not constantly reflecting and refracting it into a million abstracted ways. I think it's also why some of the worst art comes from people obsessed with "their lived experience" in lieu of actually experiencing anything at all.

[@alexanderleuchte5132]

The world did not start with Renaissance, nor did humanity, it started with cave paintings and trance rituals plunging into the abyss of ecstasy

[@Nonesovile96]

Art is the only thing that matters. I’d put Stanley Kubrick above anyone

[@kozlorog]

Great take.

[@j.aguilar5975]

Clearly the middle class knows exactly whats punk Is and isn't. Thanks for the reminder

[@snowyetie8799]

Bro we dont claim him as one of our own TT

[@Murnauk]

The first half of the video was really interesting but I think you valorise punk way too much. Some of the later points feel like trite nostalgia. I also disagree that “edginess” is an important trait for an artist - especially since the definition of what is and isn’t edgy is way to nebulous here. It’s seems to be just stuff you like but know others might find offensive? Or being deliberately offensive (to make a point)?

[@WayToTheGrave]

I really appreciated this video. I grew up in a punk and metal scene deep in the south and relocated to NYC later on in my life as I developed a passion for music and art. The relocation allowed me to really feast on the exposure to art that I love and hate, both being as important to figure out my relationship to life and humanity. When I meet others and they lack this curiosity, I find them considerably less interesting, having supposed I was moving to a place which was civilized in some way that home wasn't. What I sense at this point is a pragmatic incuriosity whose motivations I'm not quite sure about. It strikes me almost as fearful, that rather than approaching aesthetics from first principles, you run the risk of having a morally unhygienic assessment of things unless you, in some way, shape, or form, democratize your approach to it; to consult others for what is permissible and what is not permissible. Even video essays uphold this--it is content, largely, that displaces what it is it is actually doing: presenting its consumers with exactly what to think, what is agreeable, while ostentatiously pretending to be something else. I admit, I even came into video essay expecting it to be just that, more of the same, but I'm thankful to have been wrong. The spirit of punk is badly injured, culture has no idea how to divine what essential thing is lost, no way to artfully reject the creeping onset of the consumptive external locus. I really think the simplest answer is to create, to necessitate putting yourself in a place to be inspired because your job is to create, not to consume. Neither here nor there, but I appreciate your inclusion of the Canterbury Tales, an example of something which post-modern perspective has enriched beyond its status.

[@JPEGTOMUSIC]

7:30 i love this channel BUT this take has always been absolutely braindead to me 😕... people back then used to literally burn books and other people just because they posed diferent views in society... contemporary society is objectively the most open minded the world has ever been

[@CSinau32]

But people burned Harry Potter books when they came out so .... Be open minded about how truly closed minded you might be

[@SJursa-ey4tt]

"death by beauty", oversaturation, BNW way

[@MinaT77]

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Having heavily studied pamphlets that came out shortly after the advent of the printing press, I can assure you that all attitudes mentioned in this video are not remotely new.

[@JPEGTOMUSIC]

@@CSinau32 whos burning harry potter books in 2024 😭

[@Chrysobubulle]

@@JPEGTOMUSICtrans people

[@mikkelopperud4078]

I don't really understand what you're trying to say. The general culture at large doesn't understand the more transgressive forms of art? You seem to raise up certain figures that have engaged quite a lot with the world of art and proclaim them as 'punk' and 'people who get it'. Then you seem to chastise the general population for not understanding 'profane' art. Isn't that just natural? I might just be confused as to the point you are trying to make

[@klownck]

that just means you are one of those "who dont get it" and thus are not "punk". (said in jest - they really have a terrible arguing style that does confuse easily)

[@mikkelopperud4078]

​@@klownck Yeah, it's true - I cannot parse much from his arguing style. It seems like he for the most part is irritated by how simplified art is being talked about on social media. That there isn't really anything profane that sticks out anymore the way the punk movement did - which is because it has been accepted, I guess? But then there is profane art that people don't understand - he thinks that people should try harder to understand it (which wouldn't make it transgressive). I am very confused by what this man is on about. Not very punk of me...

[@movimentodoscacos]

@@mikkelopperud4078 Also, trangressive art does not necessarily stops being transgressive when people engage with it, I understand, engage and enjoy Pink Flamingos and Saló but I wouldn't say it has lost its impact as a result of my understanding of their functions as films (Saló especially)

[@natwilson9338]

i totally agree with you. this video made lots of points, some i agree with and some i don't, but i feel like looking at it as a whole i don't see a coherent thesis

[@antonco2]

He's not trying to make a point, he's just angry that we don't have a better relationship with art. Every single artist goes through this, it's part of the journey

[@guul66]

this is a weird video. i think it has a strong core point, but i feel as it every few minutes it also says something entirely antithetical to its point. i might also be reading this wrong, but it seems to extend that open mindedness means you are not allowed to dislike some art (aka even if you disagree with the comedian you should laugh) - correct me if I'm wrong. I understand this essay is based on mostly a proper analysis of a personal point of view, and there's nothing wrong with that, however this analysis could use "better" philosophical deconstruction, sociological looks, etc, however I understand that's not the goal, so ofc I don't expect that from it. I think the best example of this is the part about advertisements and artists. I think it's a very good point, but it ends short. Because without any social analysis, segregating this problem to be a problem purely of the art world, this video only offers a cheap painless version of rebellion. Of course everyone popular is doing ads for money, because the only types of people that get popular do ads for money, why is that? - its not really diagnosing the problem, like this video tries to make it seem, if it doesn't look deeper, which it seems this video seems afraid to do.

[@kungfuhustlefan25]

thank you for making this video, you’ve inspired me greatly to peruse my own endeavours and I think your style and way of thinking is nothing short of brilliance

[@heyooo1949]

reactionary video the punk you idealize never existed and all art piece you seem to know are not counter cultural anymore

[@JaeDeco]

PUNK IS ALIVE AND WELL but you (and most people who agree with this sentiment) are too busy putzing around in the common culture trying to find it. I am a pole dancer who performs and engages regularly in my communities. The "edge" is overflowing and it's almost entirely not on the internet. If you want to find challenging art or interesting conversation about art, you have to engage with local artist communities in real life!

[@snowyetie8799]

I think your to stuck in the past. Things like this DO exist. Half the things you were talking about, I have seen in the past week. If your going to talk about being open to things enough, why don’t you try to be open to the new?

[@CartoonCentral10]

This is the exact reason why I believe that Rap is one of the best forms of ART, yes ART. Because it's one of the most unfiltered genres of music out there, it's so raw and that's what I like about it.

[@ShotDrawnCut]

Brilliant! and respect for not participating in the interminable sponsorship of video essays- an instant turn off!

[@llamasunshine]

I’m so glad someone put what I was feeling into such beautifully articulated words!!! Thank you for this video, ❤

[@greagandev]

This sounds like idealism having a fight with realism, and falling off the face of a cliff, somewhere between college and having a second child.

[@ronaldodeoliveirabalbinott7380]

what a bougie essay. maybe your heart is in the right place, maybe it isn't, but the public gotta engage with what you've posted and what you've said, nonetheless. different forms of art aren't disposed over a smooth socioeconomical surface. and engaging with 'a lot of stuff' is always a compromise (of time, of money etc.), which is fine and dandy if you're talking to a public that is upper class. if not, then the question is: do you really have the voice to demand compromise? what about accessibility, for example? this is not to say underprivileged ppl can't enjoy opera, or nuns can't flirt with transgressive cultural objects; of course they can. beautiful catholic art is not just pretty, though, because of 'talented' folks: they serve an ideological agenda. a better argument, then, is what john waters said in your video: know the rules, so you can break it. but even this argument is not all there is to it. being 'punk' in your video is not a matter of 'getting it', you're placeholding the word for ppl that will agree with you bc of personal dispositions and bc of your authority as an essayist. let's be real here: are we going to pretend that the historical punk movement wasn't, a lot of the time, flying to close to fascism? it doesn't take much for anyone to see a swastiska if you're digging into their aesthetics. plus, and i mean it sincerely, the literature (from continental philosophy to academic articles and so on) is full of examples about how and why transgressiveness is just not revolutionary, at all. works and authors like sade ended up reinforcing the status quo, just like a crime legitimize certain laws. i'm sorry, but punk, at least in these terms, is not counterculture, but the very condition to a normative one.

[@beuks33]

From an American perspective: When large swaths of society have their existence and healthcare legislated away, I don't see it as anything BUT punk to critique and analyze misogyny and anti-queer art. When people's lives hang in the balance, I could give a fuck less if you feel me pointing out these things makes you uncomfortable. Sounds like you could learn a bit more from punks mate.

[@mats5784]

I don’t know if I’m educated enough to fully understand this video in a way to apply it or to conversate about, yet it was a great door opener and I will for sure comeback to it

[@CharlesVeitch]

Amazing work. Important video.

[@CogMissives2323]

Sontag called for an erotics of art criticism. We've so overly qualified and classified art, and allowed algorithms to serve us the same thing over and over again that people have forgotten that art is about emotion. Punk is pure emotion. Pure rage or love or joy. People are afraid to fear or confront discomfort. They'd rather be given the same thing over and over again.

[@thepagecollective]

In a recent experiment, people were handed 10 poems written by chatgpt in the style of Emily Dickenson and Shakespeare, etc., and 10 written by the real authors, then asked to decide which was the real author. They more often picked CHATGPT as real. They picked the ones they could understand and identify with easier, the ones that tended toward more empty imagery and phrases. They read anything challenging as machine made. And yes, I fall short of the bar you set.

[@gentlejones]

wonderful work here. i never saw the woman shitting in the woods painting before, its a knockout. did not expect shortly after to see blp kosher. this essay was a fun ride and made my day. thank you.

[@austinclark7586]

I think you'll find that the comodification and capitalization is what is making everything so similar, not nothing being punk. Give people the ability to live whether their products are popular or not and you will find an explosion of punk. The societal standards and sensibilities have only the pull they have due to capitalism, otherwise you would have people who don't care about the backlash if no one is getting hurt materially by it.

[@kungojackyo]

This is the best video on art and culture I've seen in years, maybe ever. Thanks for making this.