To David Howell's objection: I think what David is saying is that using "normal" or "real" or some class-based term as the alternative to "artsy" tends to imply that "artsy" therefore has some odd, fake, or obscure measure of worth. (correct me if I'm wrong and putting words in your mouth, David.)
However, I agree with Cheryl ... I don't see what Charles said as all that bad ... I like "artsy" stuff and I wasn't insulted. There is a reason the term "artsy" has common use (and it DOES have common use). In terms of film/video, I have believed that the term "artsy" is used because it's generally describing a subset of stuff out there that is often outside of "mainstream" consumption/expectation ... perhaps "normal" is a poor term to use for "mainstream" but cut him some slack ... he did "quote" it - which has the generally accepted implication of "for my lack of a better word" - and he has since apologized for not having a better word for it. It's the nature of the human brain to classify and categorize and label ... Charles didn't create the distinction of "mainstream" or "artsy" ... and he's hardly the first to recognize it. All that being said ... I'd love to see some vlogger win this contest no matter their style! :-) - Dave On Feb 20, 2008 2:40 PM, Cheryl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Huh. I got what you meant. Didn't find it insulting. But now I'm > curious - there has to be a more precise way to say it. Heath used the > term mainstream, which seems closer and doesn't add a word implying > social status (like "blue collar" does). > > How about "people who only drink the pop-culture kool-aid?" > > No, too weird, like me... Off to seek advice from the next wordsmith I > see. > > Cheryl > > --- In [email protected], "Charles Iliya Krempeaux" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I'm sorry you were insulted by what I said. I didn't mean to insult. > > > > The way it looks like to me is that whatever you want to call them... > > the vast majority of the people I know seem to have certain tastes in > > videos. I was trying to use a monicker that described them. > > > > I thought putting "normal" in quotes would be sufficient, and people > > would know what I meant. Maybe I should have used something like... > > "the common blue collar person". > > > > I thought "normal" would be a good monicker since you often hear terms > > like "the real people" used in political discourse to describe the > > same group. (Please note the quotes around "the real people"... and > > that I'm not the one who came up the phrase "the real people".) > > > > Again, sorry if I insulted you. > > > > -- > > Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. > > http://ChangeLog.ca/ > > > > Motorsport Videos > > http://TireBiterZ.com/ > > > > Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 8:08 AM, Brook Hinton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Whoops just saw your followup. Gosh golly, you're right, I guess I > > > don't have any "layman" or "common people" in my audience. Only > > > "royalty" and "criminals"/ > > > > > > Sheesh. > > > > > > Brook > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________________ > > > Brook Hinton > > > film/video/audio art > > > www.brookhinton.com > > > studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- http://www.DavidMeade.com
