led_zep_girl_92 Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Well, that is, what my music teacher is saying For him, the only accepted kind of music is that, what was written at least 150 years ago; mainly Beethoven and Mozart. He really said:"Led Zeppelin - that isn´t art; its just simple entertainment music." That stupid idot :rant: He had studied music in university for several years; but he has no idea of it! I don´t expect him to like Led Zeppelin, but considering them as talented musicians wouldn´t be too much!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peep Solero Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 well I think they aren't art yet....art is boxed in frames, hanging at the Luvre...Led Zepp's music is still alive and kicking, it's rock in your face. it can never be prim and proper, listen to it while having a cup of tea thing be glad that it isn't. it's freakin' raw emotion and dripping sex! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evster2012 Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Your music teacher is an ass. Art is in the interpretation. To some people the Venus De Milo is just a naked chick with no arms. Andy Warhol hangs fucking Campbell's Tomato Soup on a wall and he's an ARTIST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwizard03 Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Led Zeppelin is the Highest form of Art.It brings a Smile to your face.It brings Women to your Bed. It brings a emotional feeling that cant be described Oh yeah baby its art.Picasso just wishes He could have made Stairway or Kashmir.Rembrandt would have been thrilled with The Ocean or The Rain Song.Van Gogh would have loved Tangerine are Thank you.Michelangelo would have freaked at Over the Hills and Far Away.Monet would have sold his soul for In My Time of Dying.And My point is Yes it is Art A--R--T ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Masson Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Led Zeppelin's music is art. Visual art, too, actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyedye Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Art is in the eye of the beholder. I think LZ is art. I think JP is art in motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucyinthesky Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 everyfuckingthing is art, if you sign with a famous artists name. A torn piece of paper is art when it is made by picasso! If you want to see it like that; even Easy Listening crap is art. Not to talk of Led Zep. But you have to see that the classical stuff like Bach and Beethoven is beyond all art. It is written by geniis (if that is the right Plural...) and you can't compare their art of perfection with Led Zeps art of energy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyedye Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 everyfuckingthing is art, if you sign with a famous artists name. A torn piece of paper is art when it is made by picasso! If you want to see it like that; even Easy Listening crap is art. Not to talk of Led Zep. But you have to see that the classical stuff like Bach and Beethoven is beyond all art. It is written by geniis (if that is the right Plural...) and you can't compare their art of perfection with Led Zeps art of energy. JP and RP are not geniuses? It has been said they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainsbarre Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 Well, that is, what my music teacher is saying For him, the only accepted kind of music is that, what was written at least 150 years ago; mainly Beethoven and Mozart. He really said:"Led Zeppelin - that isn´t art; its just simple entertainment music." No, it's not art, it's rock and roll, man...and so it should be, let's not over-intellectualise it. A pudding doesn't need to be a soufflé to be equally delicious... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evster2012 Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 No, it's not art, it's rock and roll, man...and so it should be, let's not over-intellectualise it. A pudding doesn't need to be a soufflé to be equally delicious... Again, art is in the beholder. An artfully created pudding need not a souffle be! The Rain Song is art. Ten Years Gone is art. Distill it down from there. Art is creativity in action. A well executed shot block is art. Sidewalk paintings can be truly magnificent works of art. I get the rock and roll sentiment, but at times those moments of brilliance border on masterworks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHD Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 well I think they aren't art yet....art is boxed in frames, hanging at the Luvre...Led Zepp's music is still alive and kicking, it's rock in your face. it can never be prim and proper, listen to it while having a cup of tea thing be glad that it isn't. it's freakin' raw emotion and dripping sex! Now that description I like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyedye Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 the products of human creativity; works of art the creation of beautiful or significant things a superior skill that you can learn by study and practice and observation LZ creates art man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucyinthesky Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 No, it's not art, it's rock and roll, man...and so it should be, let's not over-intellectualise it. A pudding doesn't need to be a soufflé to be equally delicious... Listen, i don't want to be misunderstood! I didn't say there are not geniuses, its just a complete different kind of art! Listen to, er, Brandenburg concerts by Bach and you'll find a perfection you never heard befor. In Rock'n'Roll, perfection is boring. But in each good kind of art you'll find this supernatural vibration (sounds esoteric i know). PEACE! Edit: Oops! i quoted the wrong person. I meant to answer (and apologize to) tye dye. Sorry Gainsbarre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainsbarre Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 Edit: Oops! i quoted the wrong person. I meant to answer (and apologize to) tye dye. Sorry Gainsbarre. It's okay What is art anyway really? Art these days seems to be any object, music, physical doing that is completely useless but put on display... Actually I think that's what art should be, any object, action or decorative item that has absolutely no use whatsoever should be considered art. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie29 Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 Led Zeppelin may not be art, but I know what I like! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danelectro59 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Your music teacher is an ass. Art is in the interpretation. To some people the Venus De Milo is just a naked chick with no arms. Andy Warhol hangs fucking Campbell's Tomato Soup on a wall and he's an ARTIST. And what's up with the Mona Lisa? Not even a good looking babe at that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slave to zep Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Again, art is in the beholder. An artfully created pudding need not a souffle be! The Rain Song is art. Ten Years Gone is art. Distill it down from there. Art is creativity in action. A well executed shot block is art. Sidewalk paintings can be truly magnificent works of art. I get the rock and roll sentiment, but at times those moments of brilliance border on masterworks. i so agree with you , ev. art, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. humans are such complex creatures, we are all different. art, including music, is here for our enjoyment. to anhance our lives. so enjoy what you like, and move past things you dont. dont try to over analyse everything. zeppelin is not art........it is FINE ART!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunChild Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Led Zeppelin's music is art. Visual art, too, actually. Yes, I agree. They always take pains to present themselves artistically, visually, don't they? And what's up with the Mona Lisa? Not even a good looking babe at that You know s/he's a transexual, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Masson Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Yes, I agree. They always take pains to present themselves artistically, visually, don't they? Yep, from 1973 on, no question about it. And they always gave a good deal of thought to the album covers. But actually what I had in mind is something else: there is an unusual visual dimension in their music itself. I would like to explain what I mean later, as it is a multi-faceted and pretty complex topic, and I don't have time now to write about it properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.