Is "art" successful when it evokes an emotional response?

If that's the yardstick, Yoko Ono is a successful artist, according to
the responses posted in RMB over the last couple of years. No one
else's "art" has elicited more discussion than hers.

Have at it.

fattuc... at (no spam) yahoo.com wrote:
On Jun 14, 6:43 am, Dale Houstman <d... at (no spam) skypoint.com> wrote:

abe slaney wrote:

fat girls need love too wrote:

Is "art" successful when it evokes an emotional response?

If that's the yardstick, Yoko Ono is a successful artist, according to
the responses posted in RMB over the last couple of years. No one
else's "art" has elicited more discussion than hers.

Have at it.

I've never paid much attention to Yoko Ono as a conceptual artist as
I've never had much interest in conceptual art, period. But, let's be
frank - she is not controversial in *this* newsgroup for her musings on
art - it's for telling O.J. (Our John) to sail around the big scary
world in a stupid boat or for having floppy Japtits or some other
narrative that has little to do with your question. Her art is used as
leverage to denigrate her person, no more and no less. Most of these
people have *zero* interest in art.

Which - according to the proffered definition of art - makes her a
failed artist, since her art (as such) is ignored.

I could care less about her "Japtits", but I DO have interest in art,
and I personally find her's to be profoundly derivative, intellectually
thin, and often insulting to a thinking person. But hey it's her right
to be as much of a fraud as she can pull off, and - among the denizens
of Fraudhood - she's not the most destructive.

I will say that the definition of art given is - like most definitions
of art - relatively worthless in assessing art...

dmh- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What an artful post!

Honestly, it was created using "Essay-By-Numbers".

dmh- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Jun 14, 1:15�am, fat girls need love too

jimmycarlwh... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Is "art" successful when it evokes an emotional response?

If that's the yardstick, Yoko Ono is a successful artist, according to
the responses posted in RMB over the last couple of years. No one
else's "art" has elicited more discussion than hers.

Have at it.

LOL!  It's not Yoko's so-called art that generates controversy; it's
her delusional, arrogant, despicable statements and behavior.

On Jun 14, 10:48 am, F Parella <f_pare... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:

On Jun 14, 1:15?am, fat girls need love too

jimmycarlwh... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Is "art" successful when it evokes an emotional response?

If that's the yardstick, Yoko Ono is a successful artist, according to
the responses posted in RMB over the last couple of years. No one
else's "art" has elicited more discussion than hers.

Have at it.

LOL!  It's not Yoko's so-called art that generates controversy; it's
her delusional, arrogant, despicable statements and behavior.

I'm sorry Yoko had so much power over your emotions..for the past 40
years.

On Jun 17, 11:07 am, F Parella <f_pare... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:





On Jun 15, 2:40 pm, Jeff <yourimageunre... at (no spam) sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On Jun 15, 1:01 am, fattuc... at (no spam) yahoo.com wrote:

On Jun 15, 12:58 am, Jeff <yourimageunre... at (no spam) sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On Jun 14, 10:48 am, F Parella <f_pare... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:

On Jun 14, 1:15?am, fat girls need love too

jimmycarlwh... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Is "art" successful when it evokes an emotional response?

If that's the yardstick, Yoko Ono is a successful artist, according to
the responses posted in RMB over the last couple of years. No one
else's "art" has elicited more discussion than hers.

Have at it.

LOL!  It's not Yoko's so-called art that generates controversy; it's
her delusional, arrogant, despicable statements and behavior.

I'm sorry Yoko had so much power over your emotions..for the past 40
years.

Well, she had great power over John's, right?

If she did, it was with John's permission.

And when she used heroin while pregnant with Sean - I suppose you
think that was with Lennon's permission too?

Sure..since he liked drugs himself.

 When she ignored Lennon

and started her flings with Green and Havadtoy - I suppose you think
that was with Lennon's permission too?

Yep, cause the truth of the matter is, you can't stop a woman from
what she wants to do..and try to control her.
It doesn't work that way. A woman ":will" do what "she" wants to do.

It's like these guy's who instantly expect sex from a woman, and if
they don't get anything..they dump her.

But..it's a stupid process of thinking..cause IF a woman likes a guy
well enough..just from talking to him, she will very soon want sex
from this
guy. I know all about it, cause I made the mistake for over 40 years
of not understanding how women think.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Jun 17, 11:07 am, F Parella <f_pare... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:

Whn she ignored Lennon
and started her flings with Green and Havadtoy - I suppose you think
that was with Lennon's permission too?

If John cheated on her, he didn't have much of a right to complain when she
cheated on him.

On Jun 17, 11:07 am, F Parella <f_pare... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:

Whn she ignored Lennon
and started her flings with Green and Havadtoy - I suppose you think
that was with Lennon's permission too?

If John cheated on her, he didn't have much of a right to complain if she
cheated on him.

Or is the woman just supposed to smile, be submissive, and accept whatever
the man does without complaint simply because she's the woman?

Whn she ignored Lennon
and started her flings with Green and Havadtoy - I suppose you think
that was with Lennon's permission too?

Whn she ignored Lennon
and started her flings with Green and Havadtoy - I suppose you think
that was with Lennon's permission too?

On Jun 17, 11:07 am, F Parella <f_pare... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:

Whn she ignored Lennon
and started her flings with Green and Havadtoy - I suppose you think
that was with Lennon's permission too?

If John cheated on her, he didn't have much of a right to complain when
she
cheated on him.

On Jun 17, 11:07 am, F Parella <f_pare... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:

Whn she ignored Lennon
and started her flings with Green and Havadtoy - I suppose you think
that was with Lennon's permission too?

If John cheated on her, he didn't have much of a right to complain if she
cheated on him.

Or is the woman just supposed to smile, be submissive, and accept whatever
the man does without complaint simply because she's the woman?

Whn she ignored Lennon
and started her flings with Green and Havadtoy - I suppose you think
that was with Lennon's permission too?

If John cheated on her, he didn't have much of a right to complain when
she
cheated on him.

I suppose that is one attitude; I prefer the attitude that two wrongs
don't make a right.

If the ground rules of their marriage allowed them to have affairs, then was
it wrong?

If not, then it would have been unfair and hypocritical for John to complain
about Yoko doing the same thing that he did.

Either way, she had John's permission.

fattuc... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:8c35e013-bd00-4674-83b3-c4815c762e8b at (no spam) m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

Some of John's art is funny, witty, clever and reflects his whimsical
personality and interest in puns.

I take it you approve of the whimsical and punning aspects of Yoko's work,
as well?

"O'Leary III" <moogootgsipdan1 at (no spam) ;powjfdr.com> wrote in message

news:fbqdnRiq-940ncTVnZ2dnUVZ_r3inZ2d at (no spam) comcast.com...

BlackMonk wrote:

Why do you get to define what was a problem in their marriage?

When you say "both" had a right to complain, do you really mean that John
had a right to complain about Yoko having affairs, even though he did the
same thing?.

The Space Shuttle astronuats just returned, and were amazed that you two
are still discussing the same old shit.

I don't suppose this post of yours was any great revelation to them, either.