So Yoki Ono gave an interesting performance at Glastonbury this year....This isn't even a joke. - General

[QUOTE=Flubbman;45284232]Pardon my ignorance, but I've heard there was some controversy surrounding her and McCartney. Can someone sum up what happened?[/QUOTE] She destroyed the Beatles. My source is some guy I once met at a bar.

man i wish i could be worth millions for being a talentless hack living off of the legacy of my substantially more talented dead significant other [editline]3rd July 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Flubbman;45284232]Pardon my ignorance, but I've heard there was some controversy surrounding her and McCartney. Can someone sum up what happened?[/QUOTE] Basically she was influencing John to take their musical style in one direction, and Paul wanted to go in another. John and Paul being the defacto leaders, this caused a rift in the band and eventually lead to their breakup and whatnot. take a listen to johns solo career and pauls and you can see the massive stylistic gap between the two tho george master race amirite

If I remember correctly didn't John Lennon used to beat and abuse Yoko?

[QUOTE=SpartanApples;45284946]If I remember correctly didn't John Lennon used to beat and abuse Yoko?[/QUOTE] Yes, and according to the videos above, he rocked her dome pretty hard.

[QUOTE=SpartanApples;45284946]If I remember correctly didn't John Lennon used to beat and abuse Yoko?[/QUOTE] Allegedly the reason she was around all the time was because John always wanted to keep her in his sights he even used to follow her into the bathroom.

I'm not sure how this is interesting. I'm pretty sure these types of performances and songs are normal for Yoko.

[QUOTE=RobbL;45283395]It's anti-art guys, you unsophisticates wouldn't understand. It's pretty ironic though that this sort of thing is now seen as an example of the pretentiousness of modern art, when the fluxus movement ono was part of was originally founded to take the piss out of that very thing I don't see how it fits in at glasto either[/QUOTE] Pardon my ignorance, but why does this get boxes?

Why does everyone hate on Yoko Ono? She's irritating, but is there a backstory to why everyone hates her?

[QUOTE=loopoo;45285540]Why does everyone hate on Yoko Ono? She's irritating, but is there a backstory to why everyone hates her?[/QUOTE] The demise of the Beatles People always blame the woman first

[QUOTE=Blooper Reel;45285182]Allegedly the reason she was around all the time was because John always wanted to keep her in his sights he even used to follow her into the bathroom.[/QUOTE] Wasn't that his first wife?

[QUOTE=loopoo;45285540]Why does everyone hate on Yoko Ono? She's irritating, but is there a backstory to why everyone hates her?[/QUOTE] i have a particular distaste for talentless hackfrauds being given unwarranted activities to engage and perform in she makes me think of an annoying little sister that just screams and does stupid shit for seemingly no reason other than to try to garner the attention of others i don't go out of my way to besmirch her character, but when she comes up in areas that I frequent, I always seem to have a feeling emanating from within, desiring to put her down and say no, you are not allowed to continue any further with this farce, it's gone far enough.

[QUOTE=RobbL;45285560]People always blame the woman first[/QUOTE] Goes all the way back to Adam and Eve, really

[QUOTE=Blazedol;45285684]Wasn't that his first wife?[/QUOTE] He acted like that toward pretty much all of his women. He was a paranoid fuck who thought if he left her alone for a minute some other guy would take her and she'd leave him. Just listen to "Jealous Guy"

Frank Zappa did a song called A Small Eternity with Yoko Ono: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiQSQMSOHvA[/media] [quote=My Dad]Just because you married a rock star doesn't mean you are a rock star.[/quote]

[QUOTE=RobbL;45285507]Pardon my ignorance, but why does this get boxes?[/QUOTE] Because nobody really understands anything related to art after the late 19th century.

Yeah, I apologise for my previous post in here. I was pretty much completely oblivious about her and the stigma surrounding her. And I guess now I can agree with what everyone else has been saying about her.

I think the majority of people that go see her, is because they're fans of Lennon. That's all. And I don't give a shit what anyone says, 3 blank canvases is not art, and neither is a nail in the ceiling of a room, or screaming nonsensically into a microphone... If anything they're signs of mental instability of the worst kind Lennon's no angel either, though. Paul McCartney was more of a father to Julian Lennon than John was. Even the song Hey Jude was about Julian during Lennon's divorce. John was an actual father figure for Sean, though. Not only that, Julian had to fight to get ANY inheritance out of Yoko, for years

[QUOTE=marcoman99;45283454][IMG]http://giant.gfycat.com/NextPhonyAnemoneshrimp.gif[/IMG][/QUOTE] Oh god, that reminds me of this [IMG]http://www.90smovies.net/wp-content/uploads/90s-teen-angst-simpsons.gif[/IMG]

Everyone can have theyre own opinion on yoko ono,I get that what she is doing is a form of "art" that alot of people understand,But this [B]isn't[/B] a art gallery,It's one of the biggest music festivals on the planet! where people pay good money to come and listen to music,not screaming into a microphone because "it's a kind of art" and yes I know music is a form of art,but then if is accepted at glasto then anyone could get on to that stage and sing "summer nights" on karaoke.

[QUOTE=TheTalon;45291457]And I don't give a shit what anyone says, 3 blank canvases is not art, and neither is a nail in the ceiling of a room, or screaming nonsensically into a microphone... If anything they're signs of mental instability of the worst kind[/QUOTE] I suggest you read about Dada. It was an art movement during WWI that involved all of that stuff with the intent of making people mad. It was actually known as "anti-art" in that it was the direct opposite of the art movements of the 19th century. They were mad about the war and basically they were like "you think this art doesn't make sense? what about this war?" That was all really off-topic. Basically what I'm trying to say is that weird anti-art pieces like that are made with an ulterior motive, sometimes as social commentary. It's not mental instability, it's protest.

[QUOTE=BigJoeyLemons;45292022]I suggest you read about Dada. It was an art movement during WWI that involved all of that stuff with the intent of making people mad. It was actually known as "anti-art" in that it was the direct opposite of the art movements of the 19th century. They were mad about the war and basically they were like "you think this art doesn't make sense? what about this war?" That was all really off-topic. Basically what I'm trying to say is that weird anti-art pieces like that are made with an ulterior motive, sometimes as social commentary. It's not mental instability, it's protest.[/QUOTE] Hell of a protest she's got going on there then. Especially the protest to Katy Perry's Fireworks. It isn't a parody on society, it's just a crazy woman

[QUOTE=TheTalon;45292083]Hell of a protest she's got going on there then. Especially the protest to Katy Perry's Fireworks. It isn't a parody on society, it's just a crazy woman[/QUOTE] Oh, well yeah, Yoko doesn't know what the hell she's doing. I was talking more about the "blank canvasses" thing, since it's actually rather interesting.

The problem with most contemporary artists is that they don't understand that contemporary art is supposed to be taking the piss out of contemporary art and its artists, leading to a funny situation where people think contemporary art is art because is artistic (Though if you ask why they ramble on about something they don't understand) when in fact its a situation where there taking the piss out of themselves without relishing it and all there "Fans" are just people who ant to feel better than everybody else by trying to explain something that has no meaning to feel superior. In short Fuck you Yoko Ono for showing that this shits acceptable you talent-less hack.

[QUOTE=riki2cool;45291580]Oh god, that reminds me of this [IMG]http://www.90smovies.net/wp-content/uploads/90s-teen-angst-simpsons.gif[/IMG][/QUOTE] Yeah but when it's that fast it looks like they're just bad dancers. The original one is so slow it's actually uncomfortable.

how many 81 year olds still live the life... that's the question. [editline]5th July 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;45283868]i'm normally the last person to say stuff that is pretty out[/QUOTE] yoko ono is great [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJxH29lyFsM[/media] feel the power

[QUOTE=BigJoeyLemons;45292022]I suggest you read about Dada. It was an art movement during WWI that involved all of that stuff with the intent of making people mad. It was actually known as "anti-art" in that it was the direct opposite of the art movements of the 19th century. They were mad about the war and basically they were like "you think this art doesn't make sense? what about this war?" That was all really off-topic. Basically what I'm trying to say is that weird anti-art pieces like that are made with an ulterior motive, sometimes as social commentary. It's not mental instability, it's protest.[/QUOTE] I'm fine with art as a statement, but paying actual money to see anti-art like a blank canvas or people screaming randomly is insane.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;45294548]Yeah but when it's that fast it looks like they're just bad dancers. The original one is so slow it's actually uncomfortable.[/QUOTE] I know, but this was the best one I could find.

[QUOTE=Kljunas;45299168]I'm fine with art as a statement, but paying actual money to see anti-art like a blank canvas or people screaming randomly is insane.[/QUOTE] it's more insane to moan about it edit: when you know full well what you're paying for, I meant...

[QUOTE=Kljunas;45299168]I'm fine with art as a statement, but paying actual money to see anti-art like a blank canvas or people screaming randomly is insane.[/QUOTE] sometimes the entire point is that you won't get your money's worth if you don't care about the art itself, that you're essentially paying to look like an intellectual regardless of your actual opinions, etc. spending money to see something intentionally trite has a deeply layered irony to it that would be silly for dadaists not to exploit [editline]5th July[/editline] i mean some artists might not be smart enough for that but when the art is really stupid and people are still paying for it you can almost guarantee that's intentional, or at least that it unintentionally creates something smarter just by the statement it makes

[QUOTE=SpartanApples;45284946]If I remember correctly didn't John Lennon used to beat and abuse Yoko?[/QUOTE] wouldn't you?