[leoedin]

For those of us who aren't raging anti capitalists, it's fairly obvious that something can have artistic merit and be designed to promote something. If you have an actual argument to the contrary that extends beyond "The fuck?", it'd be great to hear it. Quoting a comedian is not really an argument.

[ontheotherhand]

"it's fairly obvious that something can have artistic merit and be designed to promote something"

doesn't constitute an argument either, does it. So there's not really anything there to argue against; just an assertion. Meanwhile, to me it's "fairly obvious" that this ain't art, and therefore "the fuck" is perfectly sufficient.

"Quoting a comedian is not really an argument."

Oh yeah, because a comedian is by definition funny, and not ever insightful.

Good thing people don't react in a butthurt, predictable fashion, or anything. Haha.

[nollidge]

> Good thing people don't react in a butthurt, predictable fashion, or anything.

Kinda spiking the irony meter here. You asserted that there's no artistic value and, what, expected people to accept that as a valuable part of the conversation?

[leoedin]

If your definition of art is only that made with no profit of the artist in mind then your definition excludes a vast amount of what most of the world considers art.

Commercial music? Artists who make a living selling their work? Commissioned pieces? Art doesn't have to be produced by the idle rich and the impoverished and starving. It's hard to define art precisely, but your definition seems to be at odds with the generally accepted one.