81–90 of 96 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're still categorizing art into "not art" and "art" you have a long way to go. As you say, Art is to be appreciated for what it is.
Something can't be art simply by virtue of being called art.
Name a porn star from the 1800s. Name a scientist from the 1800s. A bit easier, isn't it? People who can't name scientists from earlier times can't name porn stars from then either. Science isn't about popularity or notability. It's about satisfying your curiosity about nature, honestly reporting your results, and experiment. At least it is for me, which is why I got a PhD in physics. Porn stars thrive on publicity.…
Maybe the irony flies over my head, or are you seriously arguing that the absence of 'porn stars' from the 1800s makes scientists more important? 'porn stars' didn't even exist back then because the medium they use was only just invented! (I don't care about the actual discussion, but your reasoning is so flawed I was compelled to respond)
Alice in Wonderland, Alice Through the Looking Glass, Gulliver's Travels, Dante's Inferno, anything by Shakespeare.
There are endless references in those works, with varying amounts of veiling, to popular personages of the time. Some politicians and princes, but also what passes for the pop culture of the age, usually some mix of court personalities, criminals, and occasionally a notable artist or learned person ("scientist" wasn't quite applicable for much of this period).
With the exception of arts, letters, and science, most of those names are all but lost.
Porn, or gossip, or other intrigue, has a broad currency (many people find it accessible and/or interesting), but also a very temporal one.
It's not that there weren't porn stars in the 1800s (vaudeville, "Little Egypt" at the Chicago World's Fair), but simply that you'd have no familiarity with their names (unless, say, you were an academic researching 19th century and prior pornography).
Wear taller hats. You'll catch more.
I once had a heated discussion with a classical violinist about who the most known Dane was outside of Denmark. She insisted that it had to be Carl Nielsen, a composer, whom she was sure everyone would know. All her friends knew Carl Nielsen, and many of them could play his most known symphonies from memory. I'd only vaguely heard of him, and contended that maybe Hans Christian Andersen would be more known, since Dis…
That's an easy one. The best known Dane is obviously Peter Schmeichel :) The bubble of football/soccer fans is a quite populous place.
However, I'm unable to think of anyone from Argentina that is more famous than Maradonna even if I try to be as objective as possible, the only competition I can think of is Messi.
When googling a pornstar though, I'm looking for info on that specific person.
Just put them all on wiki & call it a day. Add low search weighting to the un-notable ones if necessary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ask a random stranger on the street how many pornstars he can name, and then how many scientists he can name and you'll see that the author lives in a bubble. s/random stranger/random male stranger/
You think only guys watch porn?
Name a porn star from the 1800s. Name a scientist from the 1800s. A bit easier, isn't it? People who can't name scientists from earlier times can't name porn stars from then either. Science isn't about popularity or notability. It's about satisfying your curiosity about nature, honestly reporting your results, and experiment. At least it is for me, which is why I got a PhD in physics. Porn stars thrive on publicity.…
Maybe the irony flies over my head, or are you seriously arguing that the absence of 'porn stars' from the 1800s makes scientists more important? 'porn stars' didn't even exist back then because the medium they use was only just invented! (I don't care about the actual discussion, but your reasoning is so flawed I was compelled to respond)
My post spoke not about the existence of porn stars then, but our awareness of them today.
Their notability may be great in their lifetimes, but does not stand the test of time. Scientists, on the other hand, may not attain notability in their lifetimes, but their stature stands the test of time. At least in the case of some great ones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As apposed to someone saying "I've spent many hours enjoying videos staring adult performers Belladonna and Sasha Grey so YES, I have close connections with the subject. And I believe I can objectively write a good article about them." ... ...which by Wikipedia's standards would then be ok. I'm pro-porn, but from my experience many of these 'fans' are so in awe of their idols they're far more likely to write biased e…
"I'm pro-porn, but from my experience many of these 'fans' are so in awe of their idols..." Tangential to the discussion, and maybe I live in a bubble, but do this sort of people exist? I mean, what does being a 'fan' in this context constitute? Collecting all movies of a certain actor/actress, or actually reading biographies, trying to meet (maybe 'meat'? I'm the funny guy in the family) them? I'm not even sure how…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As apposed to someone saying "I've spent many hours enjoying videos staring adult performers Belladonna and Sasha Grey so YES, I have close connections with the subject. And I believe I can objectively write a good article about them." ... ...which by Wikipedia's standards would then be ok. I'm pro-porn, but from my experience many of these 'fans' are so in awe of their idols they're far more likely to write biased e…
"I'm pro-porn, but from my experience many of these 'fans' are so in awe of their idols..." Tangential to the discussion, and maybe I live in a bubble, but do this sort of people exist? I mean, what does being a 'fan' in this context constitute? Collecting all movies of a certain actor/actress, or actually reading biographies, trying to meet (maybe 'meat'? I'm the funny guy in the family) them? I'm not even sure how…