Does it make sense to tell something like a comic publisher to get rid of the words, put their work in a gallery, and have people come try to figure out what they're saying, in order to get a genuine response? Would that be a reasonable "dare?"
You're saying I'm cutting people off from the full experience, yet if you looked, you can see them enjoying that full experience you describe under my posts, and me having fun with it, often.
I wouldn't call it being provoked. A lot of people don't get what I'm doing. A lot of people have said I'm not getting a genuine response for whatever reason they feel like cooking up that day. It gets old. It's always nonsense and it always insults the integrity of people enjoying my stuff, which is uncalled for. Tired of trying to explain as well, and I never want to. Take a lot of flak and still enjoy what I do. If I just put a picture up and said nothing, on this platform, people would find a way to pissed off about that, too. And I have no desire to follow some kind of traditional approach to being an artist in order to be accepted and fit in with a crowd. That's really no different than the aforementioned standardized AI groupthink, in my mind.
Unfortunately I'm left feeling like you ignored most of what I said and focused on the one time I used the word, "bullshit," which in that context meant I'd be an asshole if I went around telling people how to run their businesses.
Have a nice day.
So you're saying that because people like your stuff, I already have the power to violate their integrity because I provocatively stated that honest responses to your publications are not self-evident?
That means, by implication, that people who comment here always do so honestly, understandingly and authentically? If that were so, you'd probably be the only one on the planet whose audience is capable of such a thing. LOL
Isn't it the aim and desire of art to be inappropriate and if it is, I would think that the audience would also exhibit such inappropriateness.
If the combination of text and image is your kind of performance, I agree that the possibility is very likely that I do not understand it as you yourself understand it.
The example you gave me (golf game) caused me no connection between your visuals and your story. So you expect that here is a connection between what I see in the images contained therein and your golf course episode, I can only say there is none. I found the story entertaining and it could have stood alone, without the images at all.
In other words, I criticised for being confronted with too much information in this kind of performance and you can of course say that's my problem. But you could also react completely differently and ask yourself if you could possibly reduce your performance and the abundance of information, for example.
If you arbitrarily connect images with stories the whole thing rather gets an additional jumbled character for me, the statements increase in the measure that the text increases in mass and weaken the visual (my opinion, not more).
I do not exclude the possibility that others like me do not perceive the connection between text and image as a unity, but separately.
If you think I have violated anyone's integrity, you seem to have a prior knowledge of these "others", i.e. how quickly someone sees theirs violated. Whether someone does that or peels an egg on it is for the one who wants to say it to say.
You said that it was fine if I didn't understand. What now? Is not understanding and suggesting something else too much of an imposition for you? Since I have already admitted that I have no power to demand that you produce art that I can understand, this point should be adequately covered. After all, it would be too funny if I stood up and told you, "Do it differently! Do it the way I like it!" and then expect you to do exactly that.
What if you don't do it? Well, nothing, there is no consequence whatsoever in relation to you and me.
For my part, I can say that what you call flaks, provocative statements about what I said or did are the salt in the soup of my life. After all, the annoying ones, the ones giving me contra, have always been the ones who either taught me to listen better, sharpen my arguments or otherwise gain some insight. I haven't necessarily thanked them for it, of course, but have been annoyed with them, had to look at my bruised ego first, etc. - but am free to decide at any time whether it is just hot air or has some substance I want to be interested in.
I would have been more surprised if things were different between you and me. Whether you say bullshit or hot air or violate integrity makes little difference.
Of course, they would. And why wouldn't they? Is being "pissed off" something to be avoided?
Your channel is highly frequented. That means you get all kinds of reactions. Would you like it better not to receive pissed off reactions?
Sure, it is only tiresome to debate? To me, it seems, that you also like it.
That's not what I meant. You're twisting things out of shape again. At this point I have a feeling it's intentional.
I don't feel like talking in circles. If you need to win a conversation, you can go find someone else.
You participated in circling around, telling that I hurt peoples integrity. I was particularly challenged by that.
Integrity:
Show me a human being who is impeccable, unblemished, unimpeachable or incorruptible in expressing his opinion in the open and I bow to that purity of character.
I answered some of the things you asked, you explained to me or directed me towards.
It is not about winning a conversation. If that's what you see, it may be so. Though I admit that I feel provoked to aggravate you, that's true and you sensed this kind of intention correctly.
I wave you good bye.
Once again, you're twisting things out of shape and you've now admitted it's intentional. I'm not interested in taking the bait and talking in circles, nor do I feel like being messed with today. I suggest you go find something else to do and leave me out of it.
First, second, third or more times - How does that matter how often you find me "twisting things out of shape"?
Is that a crime? I do not hide it, for you are smart enough to sense it anyways.
Who is still answering after I already said good bye twice?
Now, be assured, I won't come back. It doesn't have to be that ridiculous.
Third time. You're twisting things out of shape, trying to lure me into an argument I've already told you I'm not interested in having, multiple times. I suggest you go find something else to do, and leave me out of it.
Sorry for coming off sounding a bit pushy that day. It was important for me to step out. I'll take my share of the blame. Been stressed out. I don't come here to argue though I can be difficult at times. I try not to be. I fail sometimes. You got lumped into a lot of problems so I again I apologize. I'd still prefer to just move on.
Thank you for your courtesy, I'll take it as given by you.
Being difficult isn't always a bad thing, at least that's what I've often heard about myself (from my husband, LOL), but a serene way of dealing with recurring frictions in talking to each other (especially online) can be learned on this practice field, or keeping a sort of wink in mind. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, shake hands. Thanks again for your follow-up comment. Have a good weekend.