Moonwalk FTW

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

imported_Tango

Golden Member
Mar 8, 2005
1,623
0
0
Originally posted by: dabuddha
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: sisq0kidd
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Best
Dancer
Ever

x 1000000000

It's sick.. every time I see his clips I am floored..

Hem... let's be serious...

Mikhail Baryshnikov:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=N8__iRsxG_A
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6gY4wpO8RG0&mode=related&search=
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NMAl_QeMs4Y

And the greatest among the greatest: Nurejev
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lQ3F0BxXmKA&mode=related&search=
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rshfTFWaEII
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ykS1waEUrBw&mode=related&search=

Sorry, you lose.

Come on... as I said, let's be serious. You guys are not really thinking Michael Jackson compares to geniuses like Barishnikov or Nureyev, right?

I mean... they say ignorance is a bliss... but there must be a limit somewhere.

Nureyev is universally considered the greatest dancer of all time, together with Nijinsky of whom we of course have no video recording and thus cannot really compare. This is like comparing Jimi Hendrix to Bach, and as much as I like Jimi it's just ridiculous to do so...

Sorry, you lose.

I guess ignorance is indeed a bliss.

Yes you would know about that, wouldn't ya :p

Sorry, you lose.

That's ok. I guess there's no point in arguing seriously about performing arts with somebody who obviously never entered an Opera house.

Besides: I think Michael Jackson was a good dancer in his genre. Just not the Greatest Dancer Ever as somebody here implied. That was a gross and unrefined overestimation.
 

tfinch2

Lifer
Feb 3, 2004
22,114
1
0
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: dabuddha
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: sisq0kidd
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Best
Dancer
Ever

x 1000000000

It's sick.. every time I see his clips I am floored..

Hem... let's be serious...

Mikhail Baryshnikov:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=N8__iRsxG_A
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6gY4wpO8RG0&mode=related&search=
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NMAl_QeMs4Y

And the greatest among the greatest: Nurejev
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lQ3F0BxXmKA&mode=related&search=
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rshfTFWaEII
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ykS1waEUrBw&mode=related&search=

Sorry, you lose.

Come on... as I said, let's be serious. You guys are not really thinking Michael Jackson compares to geniuses like Barishnikov or Nureyev, right?

I mean... they say ignorance is a bliss... but there must be a limit somewhere.

Nureyev is universally considered the greatest dancer of all time, together with Nijinsky of whom we of course have no video recording and thus cannot really compare. This is like comparing Jimi Hendrix to Bach, and as much as I like Jimi it's just ridiculous to do so...

Sorry, you lose.

I guess ignorance is indeed a bliss.

Yes you would know about that, wouldn't ya :p

Sorry, you lose.

That's ok. I guess there's no point in arguing seriously about performing arts with somebody who obviously never entered an Opera house.

Besides: I think Michael Jackson was a good dancer in his genre. Just not the Greatest Dancer Ever as somebody here implied. That was a gross and unrefined overestimation.

In 200 years everyone will know who MJ is. In 20 years you will be able to fit all of the people in a small room who know who Baryshnikov and Nurejev are.
 

JJChicken

Diamond Member
Apr 9, 2007
6,165
16
81
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: dabuddha
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: sisq0kidd
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Best
Dancer
Ever

x 1000000000

It's sick.. every time I see his clips I am floored..

Hem... let's be serious...

Mikhail Baryshnikov:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=N8__iRsxG_A
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6gY4wpO8RG0&mode=related&search=
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NMAl_QeMs4Y

And the greatest among the greatest: Nurejev
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lQ3F0BxXmKA&mode=related&search=
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rshfTFWaEII
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ykS1waEUrBw&mode=related&search=

Sorry, you lose.

Come on... as I said, let's be serious. You guys are not really thinking Michael Jackson compares to geniuses like Barishnikov or Nureyev, right?

I mean... they say ignorance is a bliss... but there must be a limit somewhere.

Nureyev is universally considered the greatest dancer of all time, together with Nijinsky of whom we of course have no video recording and thus cannot really compare. This is like comparing Jimi Hendrix to Bach, and as much as I like Jimi it's just ridiculous to do so...

Sorry, you lose.

I guess ignorance is indeed a bliss.

Yes you would know about that, wouldn't ya :p

Sorry, you lose.

That's ok. I guess there's no point in arguing seriously about performing arts with somebody who obviously never entered an Opera house.

Besides: I think Michael Jackson was a good dancer in his genre. Just not the Greatest Dancer Ever as somebody here implied. That was a gross and unrefined overestimation.

In 200 years everyone will know who MJ is. In 20 years you will be able to fit all of the people in a small room who know who Baryshnikov and Nurejev are.

QFT

what happened to you tango?
you used to be cool, you used to be cool
 

randomint

Banned
Sep 16, 2006
693
1
0
Originally posted by: Allen Iverson
what happened to you tango?
you used to be cool, you used to be cool

ha ha ha. i know how he feels though. we all have something/someone that we follow very closely and admire and this guy seems to be into ballet. sure it's not as popular in pop culture but i'm sure it requires a lot of skill and talent to be good at it.

it still looks goofy to me with all the tight clothes and contorted moves.
 

imported_Tango

Golden Member
Mar 8, 2005
1,623
0
0
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: dabuddha
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: sisq0kidd
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Best
Dancer
Ever

x 1000000000

It's sick.. every time I see his clips I am floored..

Hem... let's be serious...

Mikhail Baryshnikov:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=N8__iRsxG_A
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6gY4wpO8RG0&mode=related&search=
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NMAl_QeMs4Y

And the greatest among the greatest: Nurejev
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lQ3F0BxXmKA&mode=related&search=
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rshfTFWaEII
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ykS1waEUrBw&mode=related&search=

Sorry, you lose.

Come on... as I said, let's be serious. You guys are not really thinking Michael Jackson compares to geniuses like Barishnikov or Nureyev, right?

I mean... they say ignorance is a bliss... but there must be a limit somewhere.

Nureyev is universally considered the greatest dancer of all time, together with Nijinsky of whom we of course have no video recording and thus cannot really compare. This is like comparing Jimi Hendrix to Bach, and as much as I like Jimi it's just ridiculous to do so...

Sorry, you lose.

I guess ignorance is indeed a bliss.

Yes you would know about that, wouldn't ya :p

Sorry, you lose.

That's ok. I guess there's no point in arguing seriously about performing arts with somebody who obviously never entered an Opera house.

Besides: I think Michael Jackson was a good dancer in his genre. Just not the Greatest Dancer Ever as somebody here implied. That was a gross and unrefined overestimation.

In 200 years everyone will know who MJ is. In 20 years you will be able to fit all of the people in a small room who know who Baryshnikov and Nurejev are.

Sure, exactly for the same reasons nobody now knows who Shakespeare was while everybody remembers the names of the playwrights who were commercially more successful during his age... oh wait...

If anything, history proves pop culture is the fastest to disappear.

It happened in all the fields of art. Van Gogh sold only one painting in his whole life. Who remembers the names of the successful painters of his time now? Nobody.

When Impressionists started to paint, the public was outraged and they were refused en masse from the Salon de Paris and exposed in what was ironically called the Salon de Refuses.

The emperor himself ridiculed the impressionists and spent instead a HUGE amount of money to buy paintings of those who were at the time considered the most popular artists.
Then what? Now, none of those famous paintings is worth anything. Nobody remembers their names. What about the impressionists? They wrote the world's history, changing the whole western civilization sense of beauty and the meaning itself of art.

Why? Because they were timeless. They were the work of geniuses who worked not for their contemporary public, but for humankind of all nations and all ages. They will remain in history forever.

Pop culture comes and goes. Genius lasts. Who do you think will be selling more books in 50 years, Shakespeare or Dan Brown? Hemingway or Tom Clancy?

Thanks god it's not the general public who choses what is worth and what is not, but people with enough knowledge and sensibility to actually be able to assess the artistic value of things. You need to understand things before you can have an opinion. If you asked musicians who's better between Jennifer Lopez and Bill Evans, what would they answer? Yet I guess Ms. Lopez currently sells more records than Mr. Evans.

So: today I am sure more people know about Michael Jackson than Nureyev. Two questions: First, if you asked to professional dancers and choreographers (people with the necessary knowledge to have an opinion) who's the greatest between the two, what answers would you get? Second: in those two groups, the 200 people preferring Jackson and the 20 preferring Nureyev, which group would have the most advanced degrees? What group would collectively have read more books in the last year? Speak more foreign languages? Have more sophisticated taste for the arts?

In 200 years I am 100% sure much more people will remember Nureyev than Jackson. Simply because few people will remember the great Russian dancer. Basically only dancers and people caring about ballet.

But nobody will remember Jackson. So few is still more than nobody.
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Best
Dancer
Ever

x 1000000000

It's sick.. every time I see his clips I am floored..

Hem... let's be serious...

Mikhail Baryshnikov:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=N8__iRsxG_A
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6gY4wpO8RG0&mode=related&search=
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NMAl_QeMs4Y

And the greatest among the greatest: Nurejev
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lQ3F0BxXmKA&mode=related&search=
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rshfTFWaEII
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ykS1waEUrBw&mode=related&search=

aren't they different?

michael is a singer song writer dancer who created totally new styles. those two just perform old stuff correct? dudes got good hang time but its not quite the same contribution.
 

imported_Tango

Golden Member
Mar 8, 2005
1,623
0
0
Originally posted by: randomint
Originally posted by: Allen Iverson
what happened to you tango?
you used to be cool, you used to be cool

ha ha ha. i know how he feels though. we all have something/someone that we follow very closely and admire and this guy seems to be into ballet. sure it's not as popular in pop culture but i'm sure it requires a lot of skill and talent to be good at it.

it still looks goofy to me with all the tight clothes and contorted moves.

I admire beautiful things. I am no ballet expert, although I see a ballet once a month. Not enough for calling myself and expert.

Still is very disappointing to see how people nowadays swallow every sort of poor stuff the market sell to them. It's so easy to be a cultural elite considering how poorly educated on art are on average people today.

50 years ago the young rebels had Charlie Parker and John Coltrane as their music references. Today they have Snoop Dog.

Now, call me an elitist if you want... but in no way I can accept a comparison of this sort. It's just childish.

And as I said: I think Jackson is a cool dancer in his genre. But Nureyev and Barishnikov are geniuses who contributed significantly to shape the western world culture.

Just like in music John Coltrane did it, not Jerry Lee Lewis. Maria Callas, not Shakira. In film Stanley Kubrick, not Tony Scott.

It's much easier to sell records and movie tickets to teenagers than to make history. And history eventually will judge and tell them apart. It has always done it. It will always do it.
 

tfinch2

Lifer
Feb 3, 2004
22,114
1
0
Originally posted by: Tango
Sure, exactly for the same reasons nobody now knows who Shakespeare was while everybody remembers the names of the playwrights who were commercially more successful during his age... oh wait...

If anything, history proves pop culture is the fastest to disappear.

It happened in all the fields of art. Van Gogh sold only one painting in his whole life. Who remembers the names of the successful painters of his time now? Nobody.

When Impressionists started to paint, the public was outraged and they were refused en masse from the Salon de Paris and exposed in what was ironically called the Salon de Refuses.

The emperor himself ridiculed the impressionists and spent instead a HUGE amount of money to buy paintings of those who were at the time considered the most popular artists.
Then what? Now, none of those famous paintings is worth anything. Nobody remembers their names. What about the impressionists? They wrote the world's history, changing the whole western civilization sense of beauty and the meaning itself of art.

Why? Because they were timeless. They were the work of geniuses who worked not for their contemporary public, but for humankind of all nations and all ages. They will remain in history forever.

Pop culture comes and goes. Genius lasts. Who do you think will be selling more books in 50 years, Shakespeare or Dan Brown? Hemingway or Tom Clancy?

Thanks god it's not the general public who choses what is worth and what is not, but people with enough knowledge and sensibility to actually be able to assess the artistic value of things. You need to understand things before you can have an opinion. If you asked musicians who's better between Jennifer Lopez and Bill Evans, what would they answer? Yet I guess Ms. Lopez currently sells more records than Mr. Evans.

So: today I am sure more people know about Michael Jackson than Nureyev. Two questions: First, if you asked to professional dancers and choreographers (people with the necessary knowledge to have an opinion) who's the greatest between the two, what answers would you get? Second: in those two groups, the 200 people preferring Jackson and the 20 preferring Nureyev, which group would have the most advanced degrees? What group would collectively have read more books in the last year? Speak more foreign languages? Have more sophisticated taste for the arts?

In 200 years I am 100% sure much more people will remember Nureyev than Jackson. Simply because few people will remember the great Russian dancer. Basically only dancers and people caring about ballet.

But nobody will remember Jackson. So few is still more than nobody.

By comparing Shakespeare to Nureyev, you're comparing apples to Ethernet cards. Nureyev jumped around in a tight suit. Michael Jackson is one of the greatest entertainers and most popular recording artists in human history. He's sold hundreds of millions of albums, not to mention all of the controversy around him.
 

glutenberg

Golden Member
Sep 2, 2004
1,941
0
0
Originally posted by: Tango
Sure, exactly for the same reasons nobody now knows who Shakespeare was while everybody remembers the names of the playwrights who were commercially more successful during his age... oh wait...

If anything, history proves pop culture is the fastest to disappear.

It happened in all the fields of art. Van Gogh sold only one painting in his whole life. Who remembers the names of the successful painters of his time now? Nobody.

When Impressionists started to paint, the public was outraged and they were refused en masse from the Salon de Paris and exposed in what was ironically called the Salon de Refuses.

The emperor himself ridiculed the impressionists and spent instead a HUGE amount of money to buy paintings of those who were at the time considered the most popular artists.
Then what? Now, none of those famous paintings is worth anything. Nobody remembers their names. What about the impressionists? They wrote the world's history, changing the whole western civilization sense of beauty and the meaning itself of art.

Why? Because they were timeless. They were the work of geniuses who worked not for their contemporary public, but for humankind of all nations and all ages. They will remain in history forever.

Pop culture comes and goes. Genius lasts. Who do you think will be selling more books in 50 years, Shakespeare or Dan Brown? Hemingway or Tom Clancy?

Thanks god it's not the general public who choses what is worth and what is not, but people with enough knowledge and sensibility to actually be able to assess the artistic value of things. You need to understand things before you can have an opinion. If you asked musicians who's better between Jennifer Lopez and Bill Evans, what would they answer? Yet I guess Ms. Lopez currently sells more records than Mr. Evans.

So: today I am sure more people know about Michael Jackson than Nureyev. Two questions: First, if you asked to professional dancers and choreographers (people with the necessary knowledge to have an opinion) who's the greatest between the two, what answers would you get? Second: in those two groups, the 200 people preferring Jackson and the 20 preferring Nureyev, which group would have the most advanced degrees? What group would collectively have read more books in the last year? Speak more foreign languages? Have more sophisticated taste for the arts?

In 200 years I am 100% sure much more people will remember Nureyev than Jackson. Simply because few people will remember the great Russian dancer. Basically only dancers and people caring about ballet.

But nobody will remember Jackson. So few is still more than nobody.

Ahh yes, the class card has been pulled.
 

imported_Tango

Golden Member
Mar 8, 2005
1,623
0
0
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Best
Dancer
Ever

x 1000000000

It's sick.. every time I see his clips I am floored..

Hem... let's be serious...

Mikhail Baryshnikov:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=N8__iRsxG_A
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6gY4wpO8RG0&mode=related&search=
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NMAl_QeMs4Y

And the greatest among the greatest: Nurejev
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lQ3F0BxXmKA&mode=related&search=
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rshfTFWaEII
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ykS1waEUrBw&mode=related&search=

aren't they different?

michael is a singer song writer dancer who created totally new styles. those two just perform old stuff correct? dudes got good hang time but its not quite the same contribution.

Quote (Tango):
Besides: I think Michael Jackson was a good dancer in his genre. Just not the Greatest Dancer Ever as somebody here implied. That was a gross and unrefined overestimation.

Quote (tfinch2)
Best Dancer Ever

So... who is looking for the best dancer ever? Because first of all I never compared Nureyev and Jackson singing.

Nor I would compare their moonwalk. But if we want to talk about the greatest dancer ever, then I'm sorry but it's not going to be Michael Jackson. I invite you to ask this question to any professional dancer or choreographer, no matter what their genre is.

But again, I am used to thins. I hear people calling Grisham a great writer. I bet they never opened Hemingway or Proust.

And it's not an old vs. new thing. Philip Roth is a living writer who will remain in history books. So is Umberto Eco. Brad Mehldau is living a musician (actually a young one) who will remain in history books.
 

imported_Tango

Golden Member
Mar 8, 2005
1,623
0
0
Originally posted by: tfinch2
Originally posted by: Tango
Sure, exactly for the same reasons nobody now knows who Shakespeare was while everybody remembers the names of the playwrights who were commercially more successful during his age... oh wait...

If anything, history proves pop culture is the fastest to disappear.

It happened in all the fields of art. Van Gogh sold only one painting in his whole life. Who remembers the names of the successful painters of his time now? Nobody.

When Impressionists started to paint, the public was outraged and they were refused en masse from the Salon de Paris and exposed in what was ironically called the Salon de Refuses.

The emperor himself ridiculed the impressionists and spent instead a HUGE amount of money to buy paintings of those who were at the time considered the most popular artists.
Then what? Now, none of those famous paintings is worth anything. Nobody remembers their names. What about the impressionists? They wrote the world's history, changing the whole western civilization sense of beauty and the meaning itself of art.

Why? Because they were timeless. They were the work of geniuses who worked not for their contemporary public, but for humankind of all nations and all ages. They will remain in history forever.

Pop culture comes and goes. Genius lasts. Who do you think will be selling more books in 50 years, Shakespeare or Dan Brown? Hemingway or Tom Clancy?

Thanks god it's not the general public who choses what is worth and what is not, but people with enough knowledge and sensibility to actually be able to assess the artistic value of things. You need to understand things before you can have an opinion. If you asked musicians who's better between Jennifer Lopez and Bill Evans, what would they answer? Yet I guess Ms. Lopez currently sells more records than Mr. Evans.

So: today I am sure more people know about Michael Jackson than Nureyev. Two questions: First, if you asked to professional dancers and choreographers (people with the necessary knowledge to have an opinion) who's the greatest between the two, what answers would you get? Second: in those two groups, the 200 people preferring Jackson and the 20 preferring Nureyev, which group would have the most advanced degrees? What group would collectively have read more books in the last year? Speak more foreign languages? Have more sophisticated taste for the arts?

In 200 years I am 100% sure much more people will remember Nureyev than Jackson. Simply because few people will remember the great Russian dancer. Basically only dancers and people caring about ballet.

But nobody will remember Jackson. So few is still more than nobody.

By comparing Shakespeare to Nureyev, you're comparing apples to Ethernet cards. Nureyev jumped around in a tight suit. Michael Jackson is one of the greatest entertainers and most popular recording artists in human history. He's sold hundreds of millions of albums, not to mention all of the controversy around him.

I cannot debate with someone stating something like this. I don't like discussing with children.
 

randomint

Banned
Sep 16, 2006
693
1
0
Originally posted by: Tango
But nobody will remember Jackson. So few is still more than nobody.

damn you took it to heart man! Nureyev or whatever is name is the best dancer ever... happy?!?!?
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,890
5,001
126
Ahh yes, the class card has been pulled.

While I agree with him on SOME LEVELS his argument here is freaking pointless and irrelevant to the OP. He zero'ed in on an innocent remark "Best Dancer Ever" Certainly somebody with his intelligence and class can realize that MJ and an ballet dancer may have slightly different aspects to their craft which would define them as "best in their class". Or for that matter take into account that art, in ALL of its forms is ENTIRELY subjective and EVERYONE'S opinion and tastes will vary if even ever so slightly. That is the point of art in ALL FORMS.

Not to mention he tries to take the "high class" road and has painful grammatical errors all over his dissertation.

Tango if you going to go for "art" and "arguing with children" at least make it look like you know wtf you are talking about.

 

imported_Tango

Golden Member
Mar 8, 2005
1,623
0
0
Originally posted by: glutenberg
Originally posted by: Tango
Sure, exactly for the same reasons nobody now knows who Shakespeare was while everybody remembers the names of the playwrights who were commercially more successful during his age... oh wait...

If anything, history proves pop culture is the fastest to disappear.

It happened in all the fields of art. Van Gogh sold only one painting in his whole life. Who remembers the names of the successful painters of his time now? Nobody.

When Impressionists started to paint, the public was outraged and they were refused en masse from the Salon de Paris and exposed in what was ironically called the Salon de Refuses.

The emperor himself ridiculed the impressionists and spent instead a HUGE amount of money to buy paintings of those who were at the time considered the most popular artists.
Then what? Now, none of those famous paintings is worth anything. Nobody remembers their names. What about the impressionists? They wrote the world's history, changing the whole western civilization sense of beauty and the meaning itself of art.

Why? Because they were timeless. They were the work of geniuses who worked not for their contemporary public, but for humankind of all nations and all ages. They will remain in history forever.

Pop culture comes and goes. Genius lasts. Who do you think will be selling more books in 50 years, Shakespeare or Dan Brown? Hemingway or Tom Clancy?

Thanks god it's not the general public who choses what is worth and what is not, but people with enough knowledge and sensibility to actually be able to assess the artistic value of things. You need to understand things before you can have an opinion. If you asked musicians who's better between Jennifer Lopez and Bill Evans, what would they answer? Yet I guess Ms. Lopez currently sells more records than Mr. Evans.

So: today I am sure more people know about Michael Jackson than Nureyev. Two questions: First, if you asked to professional dancers and choreographers (people with the necessary knowledge to have an opinion) who's the greatest between the two, what answers would you get? Second: in those two groups, the 200 people preferring Jackson and the 20 preferring Nureyev, which group would have the most advanced degrees? What group would collectively have read more books in the last year? Speak more foreign languages? Have more sophisticated taste for the arts?

In 200 years I am 100% sure much more people will remember Nureyev than Jackson. Simply because few people will remember the great Russian dancer. Basically only dancers and people caring about ballet.

But nobody will remember Jackson. So few is still more than nobody.

Ahh yes, the class card has been pulled.

So.. level of education is a class thing?

I sit every week next to the same guy at the Met, who like me has a season-long subscription for the Operas. He's probably the most knowledgeable person on Opera I ever met in my life. And i met many Opera junkie.

He's a waiter in a diner on Amsterdam Avenue.
 

imported_Tango

Golden Member
Mar 8, 2005
1,623
0
0
Originally posted by: Homerboy
Ahh yes, the class card has been pulled.

While I agree with him on SOME LEVELS his argument here is freaking pointless. Not to mention he tries to take the "high class" road and has painful grammatical errors all over his dissertation.

I beg you pardon for those. I live in NY, but english is my third language. I thought it was obvious I am not a native speaker.

I still apologize.
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,890
5,001
126
So.. level of education is a class thing?

I sit every week next to the same guy at the Met, who like me has a season-long subscription for the Operas. He's probably the most knowledgeable person on Opera I ever met in my life. And i met many Opera junkie.

He's a waiter in a diner on Amsterdam Avenue.

Ok now explain to me why your opinion of who is a better dancer, or writer or sculptor is more correct than the OP or mine or the bum's down the street.
 

tfinch2

Lifer
Feb 3, 2004
22,114
1
0
Originally posted by: Homerboy
So.. level of education is a class thing?

I sit every week next to the same guy at the Met, who like me has a season-long subscription for the Operas. He's probably the most knowledgeable person on Opera I ever met in my life. And i met many Opera junkie.

He's a waiter in a diner on Amsterdam Avenue.

Ok now explain to me why your opinion of who is a better dancer, or writer or sculptor is more correct than the OP or mine or the bum's down the street.

:thumbsup:
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,890
5,001
126
I beg you pardon for those. I live in NY, but english is my third language. I thought it was obvious I am not a native speaker.

I still apologize.

So where are you originally from out of curiosity?
 

imported_Tango

Golden Member
Mar 8, 2005
1,623
0
0
Originally posted by: Homerboy
Ahh yes, the class card has been pulled.

While I agree with him on SOME LEVELS his argument here is freaking pointless and irrelevant to the OP. He zero'ed in on an innocent remark "Best Dancer Ever" Certainly somebody with his intelligence and class can realize that MJ and an ballet dancer may have slightly different aspects to their craft which would define them as "best in their class". Or for that matter take into account that art, in ALL of its forms is ENTIRELY subjective and EVERYONE'S opinion and tastes will vary if even ever so slightly. That is the point of art in ALL FORMS.

Not to mention he tries to take the "high class" road and has painful grammatical errors all over his dissertation.

Tango if you going to go for "art" and "arguing with children" at least make it look like you know wtf you are talking about.

Agreed. The argument is pointless. The children remark was only because he called ballet dancers "people jumping around in a tight suit". It's like calling Luciano Pavarotti "a guy singing in a funny costume".

I have a lot of respect for the arts and I personally hate people who obviously do not understand what they are talking about making fun of serious things.

I understand nothing of Physics or C++ programming. That's why I don't argue with the many nerds here who are actually knowledgeable on those topics. That's because I am humble enough to know I should keep the conversation polite so that I might learn something from them.