a real noodle scratcher!

If one misses the reference, is the joke still funny?

"R H Menzel" wrote in message news:3df26c1d$[email]...

No soap radio.

Okay, I don't normally go out on a limb and admit to not getting something when I don't have to, but i've never got that one.

Shit, I just realised I meant to say...

hehe.. Mule.

"Tom Hawley" wrote in message news:...

It's nonsense. The joke, I believe, is, two lions are taking a bath, and one says to the other, "Pass the soap." The second lion replies, "No soap, radio."

The point is, it doesn't make sense. We laugh because it's set up like a regular joke and expect it to be the punchline.

Ryan W. Mead wrote in message news:[email]...

news:...

But, now how does this relate to my original question?

was that an intentional multi-level gag though?

Bender wrote in message news:astqdd$u6t3n$[email]...

(small fart noise) Well, that shut me up!

How would you know it was supposed to be a joke? There's no laugh track on OFF (yet...)

Don't scratch your noodle. You don't know where its been.

Homercles wrote in message news:[email]...

Sorry! I meant any joke in general.

R H Menzel wrote:

Did you laugh? If so, yes.

Then again, not all references are jokes.

Don Del Grande wrote in message news:[email]...

A valid answer in any case!

True, but I was referring to any joke purposely written with a specific reference in mind.

I pose this question because in my line of work people will judge art as being good, meaningful, etc. without necessarily knowing the artist's intent. There is constant discussion on whether it is even important to know the artist's intent. There are those who maintain that the viewers interpretation is more important than that of the artist.

I thought this could also be said of comedy (among other things, but this NG is involved with comedy)

-Bob

My opinion is that it depends on if the viewer cares about the intent or not. If i see a beautiful piece of artwork that i want to hang on my wall it doesn't matter to me if the artist meant it to be something with a horrible meaning. I think maybe thats why i have a hard time coming up with titles to my work. I hate preconceptions. Heck some of you have already decided that you won't like future episodes of OFF simply because of the title or a couple of senteces describing it. If a joke has a specific reference in mind and people get that reference and hate the joke, it doesn't change the fact that the one person who didn't get the reference found it funny for their own reasons. Isn't the end purpose of a joke to make people laugh? isn't the end purpose of a painting to appeal to people no matter what the reason?

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

know

not.

doesn't

meaning. I

What kind of work do you do?

I

Interesting! When I sculpt I have strong ideas of what I'm trying to say. On the other hand, my paintings tend to be surreal and very open to individual interpretations, which I guess is the actual intent since human psychology is a hobby of mine.

Heck some of you have already decided that you won't like

Showing a lack of growth, in my opinion.

If a joke has a specific reference in mind and people get that

person who

On a certain level I agree with you. That's why Chinese (or African, primitive, etc.) art is hung on our walls. Most of us really don't understand the full meaning or purpose of an individual piece, but it appeals to our senses.

But, what if the artwork (or joke) is actually meant to convey something?

Isn't the end

I used to think so, but apparently many don't agree.

isn't the end purpose of a painting to

That is the subject of endless discussion.

at the end of the day, it's you that's looking at the piece, not someone else. if you have an idea of what something's creator had in mind when he created it, then obviously you can be somewhat guided in your perception, you can appreciate how the creator tried to achieve his intention and so on. however, a piece of art is not a math problem and the artist's original intention is not a formula. let's face it - if, beside their paintings in galleries, painters put huge notices explaining their intentions for this painting and outlining every single element of those intentions, leaving absolutely no room for your perception to manuever and basically telling you what to think, would going to art galleries be as enjoyable? (insert your own gag about art galleries already being boring here). And anyway, if someone doesn't "get" something but enjoys it nonetheless, who cares?

i dont know how this applies to jokes. it very much depends on the joke, whether it works on different levels or not, and so on. jokes are different from, say, paintings, to laugh at a joke is an impulse, to appreciate a painting is something that takes more time and thought (of course, you can like a pretty picture on first glance, but I doubt a lot of established artists have only that impulse reaction in mind). you can look at a painting, not understand anything it's trying to say, sit for another ten minutes and try to get your head round it, perhaps discuss it with somebody, and hopefully perceive it more clearly as a result. you can't not get a joke, sit around for another ten minutes and try to understand it, perhaps have someone explain it to you, and then experience the same reaction as someone who got it as soon as they heard it.

"No, you can't play with it, you won't enjoy it on as many levels as I do. Heh heh, the colours, children!!"

I would respond, but I'm afraid of being accused of being an agrumentative troll.

you're an argumentative troll. there, you've been called one anyway, now you have nothing to lose when replying

seriously though, if you're going to reply in the manner you seem to have been replying in this thread then go right ahead, i'd love to read your thoughts. however if you're going to conduct yourself the way you did in the Bob vs Chris thread then fine, i'd rather you didn't bother. it's up to you. Argumentative troll labels don't get applied without reason.

Thanks for completely devaluing the epithet "argumentative troll."

Jay

This space intentionally left blank.

Jamie wrote in message news:at2tkq$p6d$[email]...

agrumentative

You've started with the confrontational attitude you accuse me of having, so...I think you have your answer!

now

have

in

It was just my trademark wit!

You seem to have two approaches - incredibly tongue-in-cheek and pretty much useless, or very serious leaving no room for anything resembling the aforementioned tongue-in-cheek attitude on the other person's part. Can't you find a happy medium? I have no hidden agenda here - I would love to read a reply from you, and after all, wasn't it you who was calling people morons etc in the Bob vs Chris thread? Reply if you want, I'd much rather you did, but if you want to hold a grudge against me for absolutely nothing, that's your decision.

Jamie wrote in message news:at7vld$uu1$[email]...

your

having,

much

nothing,

If I only have two approaches (useless and closed-minded), why would you even want to discuss anything with me?

R H Menzel wrote in message news:[email]...

Oops! I forgot to add....

If a piece of artwork is meant to communicate a specific idea, does it negate personal opinion?

-Bob

It could. But what kind of artist would say "no you're wrong about that, this is what i meant to say". If an artist want to share his/her story with me thats fine, but if they want to tell me that i'm not allowed to have my impression of it then i just won't have the same respect for the art no matter how great it is. Btw Bob. I have developed a personal idea about the meaning of your Guardian Angel and i would love to hear your story behind it. I'm curious now to know how different our ideas are.

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

this

matter

This goes back to the argument: if art is communication, is it relevant if it cannot express the intent?

And people may be wrong in interpretation because they see things through their own experiences (while carrying their own baggage) and this may have nothing to do with what they are viewing. Example: I created a sculpture which I called "Passion". Only one person I talked to saw it as a rape scene. She saw the woman as struggling to get away from the man. When it was pointed out that the woman was pulling the man toward herself, my friend still insisted that she was pushing. When i should her that there is no way one can push with one's hands in the position my sculpted woman had, my friend then stated, "She meant to push away!"

Btw Bob. I have developed a personal idea about the meaning

I'm going to send you a better jpeg (I hope) separately, since people might complete about me taking up space or whatever the proper term is.

If you still have the same interpretation, let me know what it is. Then I'll let you know my intent. Oddly enough, no one has seen it my way until after I told them my intent.

I used to write. And then i found the internet. Now i surf. God i need to get a life again.

I try to tell a story that hasn't been told before. I used to sit in my english class and wonder if Steinbeck ever thought of the fact that millions of children would end up being tortured with his work. I really doubt it. I think he just meant to tell a good story.

I post on a tattooing board that has this argument all the time. Why do people want Kanji tattooed on them? because it looks cool. Who cares what it means or what it really says to people. I do personally believe there is a line that can be crossed though as i have a friend who found it very disrespectful to see a white person wearing a wedding dress from her culture as her daily wear.

Then hopefully the artist can manage to convey it to the audience in one way or another. To me, knowing the story makes the art all the more enjoyable and beautiful. I saw a painting in a restaurant of a gas station and written in the corner of the painting was a beautiful story about the owner of the gas station. There are ways to get the story across if you want to.

Heh. it certainly is. I love discussion though and new viewpoints.

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

get a

english

I felt that way about Hemingway!

I really doubt it. I think

people

means or

Then is everything just fashion?

I do personally believe there is a line that can

see a

Art was once important to culture. It may no longer have a purpose beyond the commercial.

way or

in

gas

In the old days an artist believed he could tell a story without words.

Odd! I came to this ng to relax from my art related job. Now I'm embroiled in more art discussions (although you are more coherent than most of the people I deal with)!

Well i didn't mean to say that i agreed with that statement just that many people feel that way. I would personally never have Kanji tattooed on me simply because i am not Japanese. I am Greek and therefore the greek alphabet would have more meaning to me. I'm not into body modification to be cool or impress. I also don't care how many people tell me that Stephen King isn't a real writer as i happen to enjoy his books and consider him to be a great writer.

I think that if north american culture keeps going the way it is then one day Jerry Springer will be crowned the King but as of right now there are still people who can appreciate the cultural importance of art. I know nothing about art but i love to learn and i don't go into museums simply because i don't have anyone who can tell me about the art and teach me.

and then we go full cirlce to the fact that people are going to interpret in their own way. lol

heh. there is no escape. I do see the points that you are making though. I enjoy being exposed to new and different viewpoints.

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

simply

would

impress.

writer

day

still

I just fear that they are a small minority, indeed.

I know nothing about

have

You seem to have an open mind. Just go and sit down in the first room that strikes your fancy. Then just enjoy and it all soak in. Remember: it won't mean anything if it ain't fun!

in

Unless there's a common "language", which is the other side of that argument.

embroiled

It can actually be scary at times, but it's amazing what we may learn along the way.

We are a small minority. I'm just too optimistic for my own good. I feel that as long as at least two people are discussing art, it is still alive.

true. I can spend hours in Angelo Rossi's shop just looking at the glass. and there isn't anything to actually think about there since he mass produces things like glasses and vases for the tourists. I guess that since the words "what a beautiful brushstroke" will never ever come out of my mouth i think that i'm not capable of art appreciation. I wouldn't recognize one brushstroke from another.

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

that

and

words

think

brushstroke

Too often people will concentrate on "brushstrokes" and not see the greater image.

I like you. You have a great attitude. (yes i really said that despite that other thread with your name in it)

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

greater

Now, why can't everyone else see that?

You don't mean that. If everyone saw it, your life wouldn't be as entertaining.

get a

Just curious....why, and when, did you stop writing? And what kind of things did you write (sci-fi, comedy, scientific journals, drama, dram-edy, sci-fi comedy, scientific comedy, etc.)?

I didn't really stop. But then i suppose i never really started either. I used to carry a notebook around at school and rather than pay attention in class, i wrote. My problem was that i had ideas but wasn't mature enough to get them down on the paper properly. I suppose i'm still stuck in that frame of mind even ten years later. I've written Sci-fi, action. I stick to the stuff that doesn't take a lot of intelligence to write.

Why do i keep getting a picture of Frink in my head?

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

things

sci-fi

used

class, i

I use to draw in the margins of my notebook. (Thank you, Sergio Aragones!)

My problem was that i had ideas but wasn't mature enough to get them

I'm still not mature enough, but it doesn't stop me from trying.

I suppose i'm still stuck in that frame of mind

that

Aha! But have you ever read Clarke, Dick or Douglas Adams?

'Cause

Professor Frink, Professor Frink He'll make you laugh , he'll make you think....

You must have the same love/hate relationship with your work too then. One minute i think i'm a genius and the next minute i think it's crap.

actually no. recommend your favourite book to me and i'll look into it.

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

I love creating art, in general. But as far as working with the "artists" at my job, I love to hate them.

Wow, favorites! This is reminiscent of the ending of Welles' "Time Machine". That's a hard one!

Er......well....I guess I'll just mention the one's from each which appealed to me the most.

Clarke - Childhood's End (For classic sci-fi)

Dick - Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (psychological sci-fi)

Adams - Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency (for well written humorous sci-fi)

-Bob

One of my favourite movies is Blade Runner and i've been meaning to find that book forever. I might have to search harder now. Logan's Run is another one i have been meaning to find for years now.

thanks for the suggestions.

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

that

Bladerunner is based on "Androids...." but is much more involved. As a matter of fact Dick would've been quite upset with the ending. But we should discuss that after you read the book.

I might have to search harder now. Logan's Run is another one i

Again, a much better book than the movie. Although, both movies are fun none-the-less.

No problemo! I told you...I'm a sci-fi nut!

Logan's Run was a childhood favourite of mine. I bought the DVD the other day simply for the commentary track and i learned a lot...about the costume design. I can't find an original version of Blade Runner though. I found that movie as a teen after they had released the "directors cut" without the voice over. Ya know, i wouldn't consider myself a sci fi nut but i suppose i am. Half of my favourite movies are sci-fi AND I went to see the new Star Trek movie last night. sigh, i'm a nerd, i'll just have to face it.

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

When it came out, it was state of the art! It's kitsch now, and in about 25 years they'll be college courses on the brilliance of this ground breaking movie. My buddy has a DVD of it, and we watched it a few weeks back. For us, it was nostalgic fun.

I bought the DVD the other day

design.

movie as

I was disappointed in the director's cut because it only added scenes of violence.

Ya

my

I'm seeing with friends on the 29th, so I'm not listening to what anyone says about it!

sigh, i'm a nerd, i'll just have to face it.

Well, remember this - Bill Gates was a nerd, and all of the cool guys in his high school put together wouldn't equal his net worth.

"R H Menzel" wrote in message news:[email]...

25

us,

I was mega-impressed by LR as a 12 year old, but the last time I watched it, I couldn't help thinking that the vision of the future it contained was that life would be one long trip to a mid-70's shopping mall.

I was also impressed in 1977 by the gratuitous breast shots. They don't put boobies in PG movies anymore.

Mercutio Jones wrote in message news:[email]...

breaking

it,

that

For most people, that's what it seems to pretty much be now.

put

The adorable Jennie Agutter in that outfit! 'Nough said!

On Sat, 14 Dec 2002, an infinite number of monkeys, masquerading as R H Menzel typed this -

I but they didn't anticipate DVD's with zoom functions then, either.. :)

<snicker> boys and boobies. some things are predictable no matter how old you get.

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

don't

you

Hehehehehehehe! You said "boobies"!

What can i say? i have a strange attraction to cheesy sci fi. I'm young enough that when it first came out, watching Fright Night in the dark with my brother when our parents were out of the house actually scared me.

Before the "director's cut" was released, a UCLA grad presented the original release print of the film in L.A. It had many interesting elements that are not on the director's cut.

The opening title card was different, for example. Instead of the scrawling words describing LA in 2017, a dictionary definition of the word replicant is presented (including the slang word "skin-job"), with the date of publication. I thought it was a much more clever way to establish the year, slang, and set up of the film.

Roy Batty calls Tyrell "father" instead of "F**ker," and apologizes to Sebastion before he eventually kills him off screen (which I wish they had kept in the film, since a sympathetic character like Sebastion deserved at least an apology). The was also a little bit of narration, but not much. There was no scene of Deckard's unicorn dream.

The only major flaw in this version of the film was some typical chase music scored by Jerry Goldsmith during the climatic scenes between Roy and Deckard towards the end of the movie. The music really changes the tone of those scenes. The Vangelis (?) score is much better and moodier.

The reaction and interest in this nearly lost release print is what convinced Warners to let Ridley Scott recut a director's version of the film.

this NG is getting me all nostalgic for times past. I think it was Vangelis' version of the Blade Runner soundtrack that got me started on my new age music phase in the mid 90's (i'm over it now)

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

Vangelis'

music

Vangelis and Kitaro were able to cross the "new age" line. I haven't listened to either in a few years and wonder if they still hold up for me.

My mom has my Yanni cd but i've got some Vangelis and Enigma here for you. Haven't listened to Vangelis in a while but Enigma will always hold up for me.

Nemesis was way way better than the last two Star Trek movies.

lol. Yeah so what? I'm a broke nerd.

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

his

Hmm! I think I'm going to have to work on that theory some more!

Nah it's a good theory. I'm just a failure at being a nerd too.

Try ebay. If you have a laserdisc player, the Criterion LD version of the original movie is still floating around. I found one at a bargain bin sale at a video store a few years ago.

Whats a laserdisc? lol. Thanks for the suggestion. I haven't looked for it in a while and haven't even tried ebay yet.

this has to be the longest running, most off-track thread ever

Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

in a

I'm sorry. Maybe if i start whining about how my opinions about my country are more intelligent than Bob's, it'll be a more worthwhile thread.

hahaha

bTW worthwhile not necessarily = on track Weebil28 wrote in message news:[email]...

are

On Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:36:36 -0800, "R H Menzel" wrote:

That's how *Apocalypse Now* can be such a powerful (though not quite great, thank you very much Marlon %amp;#ing Brando) movie even though Francis Ford Coppola is completely (I mean like 180 degrees) wrong about what it means.

Coppola was a truly great artist back then, and as such, he created worlds which, like real life, allow for more than one interpretation.

he's the comic relief!