One of our favorite musicians here at PA, is at it again. FEROZ has presented us with another dope track, 'Everywhere'. The beat keeps it bumpin' through out, and the lyrics are truly inspiring. Hurry up and download! This kid is bound to blow up. To learn more check him out at hiimferoz.com and myspace.com/hiimferoz where you can find a feature including Yelawolf! Moving on up FEROZ, and congrats from the team here at PA for the new release. Oh and wait, how can I forget to mention the simple, but sleek cover designed by none other than the great thinkers here at PA in the Mind Lab. Enough said, now turn up your speaks and jam!!!
After listening to feroz I was very depressed by the fact that he offers nothing creative or original. He's just imitating drake who I think is a horrible rapper. The problem with you people (profound aesthetic and feroz) is that you are to quick to call yourself artists. Let me give you a quick lesson on art. Creating original music is art, copying and pasting stolen words and images onto t-shirts and selling them for $26 is NOT ART. Van gogh was an artist, puff daddy and kanye west are NOT ARTISTS. You guys at pa are going to go bankrupt in a few months if you continue to pursue t-shirt design with a hip hop flavor. Hip hop is dying and so is the culture. You guys do not offer any new ideas, you merely steal others quotes in an attempt to show how "profound" you are. I'm not impressed!
ReplyDeleteCriticism is a good thing. So, one can improve on his/her fallbacks. Negativity on the other hand, tells us only one thing; that we are doing something right. Evidently, history showed us that every success story involved negative emotions and remarks from the onlooking crowd. The most essential lesson a parent teaches to their young child at an early age usually is: "If you don't have anything nice to say, just don't say it at all." This person above has demonstrated that he/she has missed out on this lesson in early childhood, or just refuses to benefit from it. Rather he/she uses their free time to create negativity in their hearts for others. Dont worry be happy. You can be happy in your spare time, no need to get yourself down because you don't appreciate others devotion. Furthermore, notice how this person is hiding behind a box, because he/she is not confident in their above statements.
ReplyDeleteget yours ale
ReplyDeleteLast time I checked, Jay-Z was standing next to Warren Buffett on the cover of Forbes, Bush was talking about Kanye West in his interview and the Billboard charts (on a world-wide scope) are taken over by "hip-hop" culture. Doesn't sound too dying to me, don't know which planet you're living on, but let us know so we can send some hip-hop in your direction and make you a less bitter person.
ReplyDeleteOn a side note, if you only consider art to be that which is portrayed by artists such as Van Gogh I'd suggest taking an art course at your local community college and learning the vastness of that which is called "art" you'd also learn that Van Gogh too was tremendously influenced by other artists such as Jean-François Millet with striking similarities in their works. Maybe you should go scratch off Van Gogh too from your list of "real" artist and if you keep going in that direction and you'll soon be left with no real artists. We are human, the best way we learn is through influence by others, a psych 101 class will teach that.
Art is so subjective and for you to limit it to the level you have is, in my humble option, very small minded of you. You may be right, there are quotes that are use that have come from artist's lyrics, but you are missing the bigger picture, not everything needs to be created from scratch. The world is full of creativity and art is everything around us. To be able to be influenced by something powerful and to shape it into something that gives it even more meaning is powerful. Why does that bother you so much? If it is the hate in your heart for something that is blossoming, I'd suggest a reassessment of your inner soul. Best Wishes to you.
Art, hah! Had Anonymous #1’s comment not been in such poor taste, I would’ve given out a chuckle at yet another 20 something college kid's understanding of art. What do you know about art? Your two cents on art is from the two lines of art that you may have read from two books in two of your art history classes. Art? I'll tell you what art is, son, art is not the masterpiece created, art is the love that creates the masterpiece. Art is not the Van Gogh you talk of that you portray to know so much. You may know every Van Gogh by name and have every poster of Van Gogh adorning your walls, you may have been to Paris and gazed upon the Eiffel Tower or walked to cobbled streets of the Vatican and taken a few pictures to put up on Facebook and thought of yourself as a refined man, you may have read about the Taj Mahal in books and know every dimension of every tile and every angle of every flower, but son, your desire to impress yourself is a travesty only of yourself. There are two types of people in this world -- one that buys a Picasso for pride and prestige, for investment, for the monetary backbone it provides his/her assets, and the other that buys the Picasso out of love and respect. Not because of Picasso’s masterful stroke work, but because of the love that created the masterpiece. There is beauty in the Taj Mahal, no doubt, but there is a greater beauty in the love that thought of the Taj Mahal and the vision that built it.
ReplyDeleteArt is the way a mother holds her baby, art is the way a gladiator fights, art is the way couples break the shackles of societal bondage to be with one another, art is a Feroz song that touches a heart, art is a profound shirt that inspires a soul. Art is love, art is honesty, and art is beauty.
Artists, visionaries and connoisseurs know it; anonymous kids one day will learn.
Zain ahmed: Art is the way a mother holds a baby? Hah! You must be in high school that is a weak metaphor and says nothing about what art is. Art is not van gogh? Hah! How can that be? He was a famous painter who created works of art. Art is a feroz song that touches the heart? That's just plain corny. If feroz touches your heart then i wonder what else he touches. you're a dull person and you've already proved how little you know about art. What do I know about art? Well, I know art is definitely not feroz or any of the other irrelevant metaphors you used. Art is something original and innovative. It is the successful reinterpretation of something done before. Art is pain not love. After all some of the greatest artists were cynical and created their work under dismal circumstances. When did I profess to have extensive knowledge on van gogh? I was merely using him as an example of a true artist to reinforce the point that pa and feroz are not artists.
ReplyDeleteQuite a talent you have there, kid, picking words and phrases out of context to explain me my writing. The use of multiple, varying and opposing symbolisms (mother, baby, gladiator, victory, bondage and love) were used to exemplify the limitless definition of art, that art is not restricted to a Van Gogh. Art is not restricted to just a Mozart or Van Gogh, not restricted to the age-old definition that art has to comply with certain norms to be defined art, that art can only be art if created by lecherous old men of yesteryears, that art can only be art if auctioned off at Christie’s and Sotheby’s.
ReplyDeleteWeak metaphor? I'm not here to articulate esoteric forms of symbolism that only I can comprehend, and hence, try to flatter myself. If I need to flatter myself, I don't have to do it online. Anyway, someone who finds the essence of all love weak, whether used as an example or not, is immature at best and ignorant at worst. So you, whoever you and your compatriots are, may find it a weak metaphor, but it is from the weakness of everyday love, the ordinariness and at times banality of everyday life that artists draw inspiration and depict that beauty in whatever forms of art they create. Art is an expression of love. Pain creates art? That opinion is held only by teenage boys dumped for the first time after some weeks of puppy love.
Also, seriously, your use of snide references, rather, sexual undertone to equate to music touching the heart only reiterates that you're just stuck in adolescence. Even 16 year olds don't use those references anymore.
So, think what you will of yourself and your dearth of knowledge, mahatma, just keep your profanity and your delusional self grandiosity to yourself.
P.S. And if you do want to get personal, as explained earlier, let's take this offline. You know how to find me... -- http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=53600121
It seems that some misrepresentations have been employed here. Firstly, everybody is a Beatles fan, whether directly, or unknowingly. The Beatles are the quintessential music band, and along with The Velvet Underground, they represent themselves as pioneers regarding the majority of Western American music today. Indeed The Beatles, along with The Velvet Underground owe a debt of influence to earlier musicians such as Chuck Berry and Robert Johnson; however, their debt is that of abstraction rather than facsimile. As for the perceived jealousy on your part toward The Beatles iTunes sales, why does it matter if people keep buying their records (even though they should and probably do already have it). How would you perceive someone who said "I don't understand why people would buy the same few Profound Aesthetic shirts over and over again". Regardless, Micheal Jackson owned the rights to The Beatles catalog, and even though The Beatles essentially begged him to sell them their music at market value, he denied their personal request. As for the iTunes catalog showing up recently; the remaining Beatles are the reason why it took so long to begin with. They were against it, and with the prospects of iTunes gaining the rights to the catalog, they became overly cautious (and rightfully so) of it's digital treatment. Indeed, to a very significant capacity, no idea is original. However, the institution of gaining inspiration from, and sampling are very respectful ways of paying homage while becoming the artist yourself and creating art that employs certain elements of the prior, and does so in a manner that essentially creates a new product. Art is certainly many "things" in the contemporary treatment that it has been given, however, it must be creation. It cannot be repackaged nostalgia. That is the literal definition of a hipster.
ReplyDeleteAs for "Gay-Z" and Warren Buffet being on the cover of Forbes together, what does that speak to you? What does Forbes represent? Are the answers to my questions the makings of an art magazine? "Gay-Z" being on the cover of Forbes represents that he is a successful businessman. However, fiscal success has never been a method of measuring the quality of an artist, independent of the genre of art. If your argument is art, and you are (or fall parallel in belief to) someone who believes in the quality of "art" rather than some absurd company that makes a a lot more money than your company does, but just makes the same silly dragon designs, then "Gay-Z" on Forbes seems disingenuous and irrelevant to our conversation. The advent of Hip Hop was achieved musically through the sampling of the enormously influential German band Kraftwerk. Hip Hop was always a bastardized genre whose parents consisted of Blues, Jazz, Funk, and Electronica. However, early Hip Hop was heavily Kraftwerk influenced. It was essentially electronica beats being looped over. Late eighties and early nineties Hip Hop would musically employ Jazz and Funk, and nineties Hip Hop would employ a coalescence of the formers. However, "contemporary" Hip Hop has reformed cyclically and has unfortunately regressed to the commonplace of uninspired electronica. Being that Hip Hop has historically been a venue for lyrical progression, and has musically reminded it's audience of their rich musical past, it has now become a lyrically-light genre with music that is more indicative of contemporary studio 54 disco. I would like to pose a disclaimer here. I am not one of those people who believes that an artist is only one who creates from scratch. Admittedly, when The Beatles composed music, they created original sounds from their guitars and drums with the inspiration of prior music in mind. When Pete Rock made beats, he would mash up pre-composed music. However, I still consider what Pete Rock did as art. However, to literally pick parts of certain songs and glue them together, this does not constitute art. And to have a Profound Aesthetic shirt that says "New York State Of Mind" does not constitute art. Finally, art is escapism. The purpose of popular culture is to escape from reality. So in the grand scheme of things, none of this is necessary. However, since we are "privileged" enough to have the luxury to discuss what "art" is, I will say the following: Art is unapologetic. The comment about the whole "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" ethic, you are referring to morality. Art does not depend on, nor should it, or it's interpretations be dependent on kindness. Just creation. How profound is that?
ReplyDeleteAs for "Gay-Z" and Warren Buffet being on the cover of Forbes together, what does that speak to you? What does Forbes represent? Are the answers to my questions the makings of an art magazine? "Gay-Z" being on the cover of Forbes represents that he is a successful businessman. However, fiscal success has never been a method of measuring the quality of an artist, independent of the genre of art. If your argument is art, and you are (or fall parallel in belief to) someone who believes in the quality of "art" rather than some absurd company that makes a a lot more money than your company does, but just makes the same silly dragon designs, then "Gay-Z" on Forbes seems disingenuous and irrelevant to our conversation. The advent of Hip Hop was achieved musically through the sampling of the enormously influential German band Kraftwerk. Hip Hop was always a bastardized genre whose parents consisted of Blues, Jazz, Funk, and Electronica. However, early Hip Hop was heavily Kraftwerk influenced. It was essentially electronica beats being looped over. Late eighties and early nineties Hip Hop would musically employ Jazz and Funk, and nineties Hip Hop would employ a coalescence of the formers. However, "contemporary" Hip Hop has reformed cyclically and has unfortunately regressed to the commonplace of uninspired electronica. Being that Hip Hop has historically been a venue for lyrical progression, and has musically reminded it's audience of their rich musical past, it has now become a lyrically-light genre with music that is more indicative of contemporary studio 54 disco. I would like to pose a disclaimer here. I am not one of those people who believes that an artist is only one who creates from scratch. Admittedly, when The Beatles composed music, they created original sounds from their guitars and drums with the inspiration of prior music in mind. When Pete Rock made beats, he would mash up pre-composed music. However, I still consider what Pete Rock did as art.
ReplyDeleteprofound pathetic your essay sucks.
ReplyDeleteawwwww I think "Profound Pathetic" took a quick writing class before he wrote this up. We're proud of you, "Profound Pathetic"! Keep up the good work; anything we can do to better you, that's what we're here for. Way to go! A+++, SUPER DUPER.
ReplyDelete:)