"Gotta get down on Friday." What went right here?

"Gotta get down on Friday." What went right here?

Attached: 1586501860197.jpg (1600x1600, 242.05K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=8HIumaslA34
imgur.com/nHQyL18
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Nothing.

Attached: TheRealRebeccaBlack.jpg (1125x2001, 294.19K)

/thread

...

botox

post more pictures of her and i'll let you know.

myspace angles, lol

Everyone rejected her instantly. No praise meant she never felt a need to maintain a look or public image. It's easier to become something better when no one wants you to stay the way you are.

Because the song was so universally hated and panned her "carrier" never took off, ergo she was never handled by the Jewish pedophile Hollywood machine.

Just another queen

That dress-shoe combination.. jesus..

So then it's not bad or good, it's just what you like or don't like. You shouldn't apply sweeping generalities to your tastes, because Friday is on all objective accounts a bad song.

>music
>objective

not only are you mentally retarded in general, apparently you think the word "bad" has a very narrow definition

>implying there is no objectivity to art
Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it doesn't exist

A child's scribble and a Van Gogh are not on equal footing just because you might happen to "like" one more.

She’s a dyke

there is barely objectivity to anything, especially art.

who defines what is good or bad art? the populace, or elite critics?

If I like the child's scribble, I am justified in using the word "good" in the sense that it pleases me, and I find things that please me to be "good".

I think very few creative works of any kind are on 'equal footing' as that seems a pretty simplistic way to be viewing things.

I mean, it seems your only issue was with my use of the word good, but go ahead and backpedal or whatever in your next post if you like.

The only file I’ve seen that’s less than a KB

Tit job and filters

Technique, knowledge, talent, creativity?

You're thick.

>all subjective and opinion based

Nah, these things are demonstrable as opposed to some nebulous opinion of "ya it gud I liek it"

Entirely subjective.

She is Jew, you know

knowledge is subjective? is that a joke?

So your arguments are going to consist of you repeating the same dumb thing over and over. Okay have a good one

Talent, technique, creativity, all subjective.

Knowledge, also yes, subjective. But less so.

you're a fucking idiot.

Ah, i see. So who is superior, Rothko or Mondrian?

You know where the end result of your thinking ends up? Hitler saying Breker is a valuable sculptor and saying lets gas Picasso. I'm sure you'd have had the Futurists banned because they sought to outrage audiences by rejecting consensus notions of quality.

You're the one that's thick. I wish we could gas you.

Tell me, user, which color is "best?" Which is your favorite, and what makes it so?

such elaborate argument! i do believe we have a philosopher on our hands. A rarity for Yas Forums...I'm honored.

I've always loved her

imgur.com/nHQyL18

No.

2009: reality
2020: anime adaptation

You don't get it, user, he seeks to be able to measure art objectively. Once we demystify that which makes art "good or "bad" we can safely have learned and scholarly art critics like himself rate it on his handy-dandy quality scale for us...and then we can FINALLY know what we should like or dislike? Won't that be great?

Wait so is she a fucking dyke or some shit?!

>a jar full of jizz with a mlp figurine inside is art
>a neat row of piss jugs is art
>this post is art

Also, i forgot to add that objectively speaking, every single prog band that has ever existed is better than every single punk band that has ever existed.

>>this post is art
well, my post had more words in it, and it took longer to type, therefore it is OBJECTIVELY better

Keep continuing to not address any point and utterly fail at basic logic/comprehension

Pleasant art and good art are two different things. What you enjoy listening to and what is musically correct often have very little overlap. In film you would call it shlock. In literature you would call it drivel. It provokes no meaningful inspection nor does it really even follow the rules of what is musically correct according to western musical convention. She was at best deeply untalented. I can't speak for her current skill as I haven't thought about her since probably 2012.

They really aren't though. The rules are predefined and you either follow them and execute properly or you don't.

You sound like a flat earther.

Good genes. Rich dudes marry hot women creating hot rich babies. Any girl with a shitload of money would have done the same at the age she did that.

Subjectively though.

effort does not equal quality

Nah

>ITT: former art/music/film 'critics' who can't cope with the fact that, because of the internet, art consumers can directly take in most all of it for free and decide for themselves, thus bypassing any possible need for their oh so well-informed opinions

>meaningful
>objective

wew lad

No, as a result of several thousand years of evolution leading to your ear being able to discern patterns of sound waves as meaningful or not meaningful. One can make the argument of who decides what is meaningful and that's missing the point. The point is that there are rules for what is correct that when followed mean good sensible music is made. It may not be pleasant but it is good in the sense it is correct. The inverse is also true. Noise metal and industrial are rarely correct and good, but there are people who enjoy it.

jahwohl! anyone who paints a sky green and the ground blue ought to be sterilized!

I remember posting on Yas Forums when this first came out, fuck

Attached: 1565524967046.jpg (387x302, 21.37K)

Nah. Subectively.

Attached: 1560559315460.jpg (500x361, 34.86K)