There is a piece of art called “The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living” that’s essentially a shark in a giant case of formaldehyde. I think it’s complete and utter bullshit, but it sold for millions of dollars. Even I get tired of someone staring at it saying “oh the shark is so aggressive and we sort of imagine it coming at us, thinking of our own death, and a denial of the notion of death as a symbol in and of itself. Can we understand the deadness as a shark?” No, this was a man who thought putting a dead shark in a case of formaldehyde would appeal to art snobs like you, and consequently made him millions of dollars. These people have their head so far up their own ass, I’m surprised they can enjoy anything.

But, having said that, what you’re doing is just as bad.

Some people like Van Gogh because they stare at his paintings and feel moved. Who are you to say that because you think his paintings are childish, that it’s the only outcome possible for other individuals? People who see the technical mastery in film should keep their opinion to themselves, but your opinion should be spread freely unto the world? What makes yours more valid than theirs? Art is a subjective experience. I can clearly explain the entire 2001: A Space Odyssey movie to you from beginning to end, including what the narrative meant and what Kubrick was trying to say. I could say you’re an idiot for not getting it, but I’m not a snob, so I nod and smile and move on.

I can understand the gist of what you’re trying to say, but this post is a complete disaster in logic.

Why are you crusading against pretentious snobs when clearly, you are one?

It’s ridiculous that my major included four production classes and countless B.S. classes, including pointless made-up courses for the major, pointless Gen-Eds, and “writing intensive” courses where the writing isn’t what’s valued, it’s the ability to pull B.S. out of nowhere and “create a thesis about Michaelangelo’s sonnet and use examples to support your argument” which is not even a question. If I weren’t two classes from graduating, I’d drop out.

We need to get rid of this fake “intellectual” snobbery and start focusing on actual intelligence. This is why our country has become a nation that consumes everything and produces next to nothing. We outsource everything and colleges no longer teach people how to do a job. Thus, the government has to support people, and eventually down the road you get communism. Seems like kind of a stretch, but it’s not.

I’d rather go back to the days when intelligence was measured by KNOWLEDGE and SKILL, not the ability to B.S. stupid conversations to “seem smart”. These “academic” airheads can keep their pretentious, substance-free crap.

Naturally I can’t have anything against those who want more than “just a plot” but I’m pretty tired of the same people arguing that their method is better. Why else would “top 100″ books lists have horribly boring stuff like Ulysses on it? In the List of best 20th century novels, the editor’s list didn’t even have LOTR on it, whereas the readers list put it at No. 4. What does that tell us? It shows us a fundamental disconnect between what some people think good books should be and what we as readers know the good books are.

what do you have to say about all the people who start watching action movies and jump on the bandwagon and love certain complex plot stuff, deep down because its cool, and dont want to say they watch alot of “art movies” for fear of being labeled pretentious, are they also pretentious? or is there a bit of a double standard going on here?