artartartartartartartartartartartartartartartartartartartartartart
pseudo-artsy sea lions defend the artistic value of Korf's "Purple Mountain"
None ( ._.)

Sponsorships:

Vote metrics:

rating total votes favorites comments
(3.77) 78 2 37

View metrics:

today yesterday this week this month all time
0 1 0 0 4,035

Inbound links:

views url
93 http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/e202b/what_video_game_do_you_think_fits_your_definition/
41 http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/e202b/what_video_game_do
1 http://yandex.ru/yandsearch?text=BACK+TO+YTMND
1 https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/e202b/what_video_game_d
1 https://google.com

Add a comment

Please login or register to comment.
November 29th, 2007
(1)
Once again I beg to ask, "Why not?"
November 29th, 2007
(0)
ha ha ha ha
November 29th, 2007
(-1)
+5 for effort and creativity
November 29th, 2007
(-2)
artmnd
November 29th, 2007
(0)
So weird, but can't stop laughing
November 29th, 2007
(1)
I don't see what's so "pseudo-artsy" about shaking babies. I really don't. I also don't see how "art" is something exclusive. This is art. It's just bad art.
November 29th, 2007
(2)
Also, you cut off General Tso Zee Zod. How disrespectful of you. Why even make a site without him? I mean, come on, he's Purple!
November 29th, 2007
(0)
YEAH WEYAH SHAKIN' A BAY-BEH NOW (shakin a bay-beh!)
November 29th, 2007
(0)
How can you qualify art as bad? There is no "bad" art, only art that suits your tastes, and art that doesn't. Art is a subjective medium for self-expression after all.
November 29th, 2007
(2)
Bad is a subjective term. This art is bad. There's not much art here, actually. I can't really tell what this is supposed to say, because artsy is an insult yet he's saying my site was pseudo-artsy so maybe he thinks I'm intentionally parodying artsy or maybe he thinks I tried to be artsy but failed... it's very ambiguous. What I do gather is that somehow I held my site up to be "art" and have "value" in some way that he doesn't hold his site as? It's very unclear.
November 29th, 2007
(1)
My best guess is this: While my site was obviously terrible art, his piece of art is so minimally expressive that he's actually making my work seem better by comparison. Nice juxtaposition (word). If my site is pseudo-artsy, this is flame-artsy. And flamers can't help but make whoever they are flaming look that much better by comparison. So, in closing, thanks for this site! It's amazing how great you make me look just by being yourself!
November 30th, 2007
(1)
or this site is just funny and makes people laugh... no esoteric contemplations necessary.
November 30th, 2007
(1)
"How can you qualify art as bad? There is no "bad" art, only art that suits your tastes, and art that doesn't. Art is a subjective medium for self-expression after all." So retarded songs like "Milkshake," "Hollaback Girl," "My Humps," and "Candy Shop" can be considered "personal expression?" If so, then I DEFINITELY don't want to meet the people who wrote those songs, because they've just expressed themselves to be rather dim.
November 30th, 2007
(0)
i hate the word art, it makes me wanna jack off in my hand and wipe it on someones face. I dunno though, i guess seals are exempt from my cum encrusted grasp
November 30th, 2007
(0)
Well, my interpretation is that some people, represented by the seals, will call anything "art". What else can a seal say? If you show a seal anything and it reacts, it basically kind of makes the same "artartart" Dew Army type noise wether it's a Rembrandt or a statue of the Virgin Mary made of elephant dung or a bunch of random lines and squiggles. It's critiquing the critics more than the art itself.
November 30th, 2007
(0)
The key is in the description. "pseudo-artsy sea lions defend the artistic value..." Sea Lions can't be pseudo-artsy, but Sea Lions as an abstraction of people (who only know how to say one thing) can be. But, that's just my oppinion. I think the shaken babies are used because many pseudo artists simply think up the most shocking thing they can to pass off art.
November 30th, 2007
(0)
This is a criticisim many people have had of "modern" art and that some have tried to defend. For some examples check out http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/T/thinktv/comments/jan03_beijing_comments.html and http://www.electric-review.com/archives/000007.html
November 30th, 2007
(0)
Just to clarify, I'm guessing Wootsat picked Korf's ytmnd because of the shaken baby shock value (like anything is shocking on ytmnd any more), when really almost any similar more abstract image would have worked.
November 29th, 2007
(0)
winter time.
November 29th, 2007
(0)
a stupid site made stupider.
November 29th, 2007
(0)
lol
November 29th, 2007
(0)
wat
November 29th, 2007
(0)
Federer'd!
November 29th, 2007
(0)
WTF man you been smoking the reefer
November 29th, 2007
(1)
5d because i have no idea what the f*ck is going on
November 30th, 2007
(-1)
i have a nasty rash, but i still 5 this
November 30th, 2007
(0)
Though I don't agree with the message you are portraying in this piece I do respect the work you put into it.
November 30th, 2007
(-1)
oh for a second i thought the babies were barking
November 30th, 2007
(-1)
Not even epic music.
November 30th, 2007
(-2)
NEEM NEEM NEEM NEEM NEEM NEEM NEEM NEEM NEEM NEEM NEEM NEEM NEEM NEEM NEEM
November 30th, 2007
(0)
Quinten Tarintino enjoys shaking small asian babies to get all the rice out of them. Rice is used to make rice pudding. Using these facts we can extrapolate that QT enjoys rice pudding.
November 30th, 2007
(0)
animals seem to like korf's work
November 30th, 2007
(0)
F*ck yea Buckethead
November 30th, 2007
(0)
This is like the recurring nightmare I used to have after I lost the doubles tournament back in highschool. But -3 for artsy b.s.
February 8th, 2008
(0)
oly sh*te you're retarded.
December 1st, 2007
(0)
what the f*ck am I looking at