RANTING/VENTING MEGATHREAD 3.0

Reminds me of the old Woody Allen joke

“There's an old joke - um... two elderly women are at a Catskill mountain resort, and one of 'em says, "Boy, the food at this place is really terrible." The other one says, "Yeah, I know; and such small portions."

If the salary is crap why are you complaining about the entry requirements?

I wonder how many people apply. I've heard unis can get a hundred or two applicants

In fact, a friend of mine is doing an online masters just for the hopes of getting into a Korean uni. With no experience teaching adults, either.. :/

1.985m KRW for a fecking MA and/or PhD holder...with zero job security.

Bye korea. It’s been real.

You'd be surprised how many people (foreigners) will actually defend it.

If the salary is crap why are you complaining about the entry requirements?

It's indicative of a larger overall trend of requiring more while compensating less.

This is a big city national university, too, not a small unknown crap college in the sticks.

If I pay for an MA (which is placing an order / the bill), I want to get large portions of delicious food.

If I pay for an MA (which is placing an order / the bill), I want to get large portions of delicious food.

Ok fair point, what was this uni anyway?

Because he's a cultural relativist. In his mind no art form or culture can be objectively better than another. There's no intrinsic difference in quality between Sam Hammington sucking on a crab's leg and an episode of Seinfeld. They can only be described as different and not understood properly if you don't come from that culture. He tires to put this way of thinking across at every opportunity.

Look, if you're going to compare things, at least compare things you are capable of understanding because you are fluent in the language and can pick up on any cultural references and such. If you aren't even fluent in the language, the criticism becomes a bit hollow because there's no getting around this- Part of it is based on ignorance.

As for cultural relativism vs. absolutism that the absolutists fail to acknowledge, is that this game can go on forever. Bash Kpop and point to some hipster band? Then someone will compare the hipster band to classic rock. Then someone will compare that to classical music. Or take Seinfeld, "TV is such lowbrow entertainment, why aren't you reading Moliere?" And I'm sure there's some snob out there who poo-poos Moliere. You know those types exist and how insufferable they are.

If I don't like something, I don't like something. I may have my opinions on high vs. low entertainment and what constitutes it, and whether I enjoy various incarnations of it, but I'm not going to get bent out of shape over it. I'm pretty sure everyone here has something exceedingly dumb that they enjoy and others dismiss. Heck, I enjoy watching 22 people bash themselves to a pulp while tossing around a ball. I enjoy seeing two human beings smash each other inside a metal cage. I enjoy watching cars go around in circles at high speeds. I enjoy watching 3 men hit each, poke, and smack each other and make various strange noises. I enjoy watching a cartoon mouse horribly brutalize a cartoon cat. I enjoy listening to a person suffering from mental illness imploring the listener to engage in acts of carnality with various bioforms over a synthesized track. I enjoy telling some 8-bit human caricature to jump at certain times on the heads of mycological animations and assorted testudines.

Who the eff am I to judge so harshly?

I'm not going to get bent out of shape over it.

hmm

Forgot my lunch again today and I'm stuck eating convenience store garbage.

Tempted to just trash it and try for something at my local Paris Baguette instead.

but I'm not going to get bent out of shape over it.

hmm

 

Hmmm, indeed.  This is the same guy who was lecturing another person about 'letting it go', something he is clearly incapable of.

I'm not sure you need to be anything above basic level Korean to listen to Sam Hammington slurping on a crab claw and the dimwits in the studio saying '맛있겠다'.  All that involves is noises and a basic Korean phrase we hear 11 million times a day.  Culturally, we get it.  But it's totally on par with Seinfeld.  Knowing Martin's cultural dimwittery, surely he can see that Seinfeld is still considered a comedy great decades after it was shown, whereas I doubt in twenty years time people will still be remembering Sam Hammington slurping on his crab claw. 

Forgot my lunch again today and I'm stuck eating convenience store garbage.

Tempted to just trash it and try for something at my local Paris Baguette instead.

Some almonds, some dried mangoes and some dried prunes, and some jerky can work in a pinch. At least you wont feel heavy after lunch.

Or maybe it's a day to go raw! 1 whole zucchini and 1 whole carrot (or other vegetable of choice you can eat without condiments).

Some almonds, some dried mangoes and some dried prunes, and some jerky can work in a pinch. At least you wont feel heavy after lunch.

Or maybe it's a day to go raw! 1 whole zucchini and 1 whole carrot (or other vegetable of choice you can eat without condiments).

Nuts and dried fruits are snacks for in between meals for me, I'll be hangry all day if that's all I eat for lunch, lol.

And I don't eat raw veggies from the market unless I've prepared them beforehand (i.e. scrubbed them down and peeled them). Plus, the ones near my school only sell them in bulk, and I don't want to buy 10 cucumbers for lunch, lmao.

I think I'm just gonna buy a chicken salad from PB (I don't really like the salads from there, but better than the crap I have right now), and maybe also buy a strawberry yogurt smoothie from this flower shop cafe I kind of like.

I was really looking forward to the lambchop and eggs I made this morning, though.

Knowing Martin's cultural dimwittery, surely he can see that Seinfeld is still considered a comedy great decades after it was shown, whereas I doubt in twenty years time people will still be remembering Sam Hammington slurping on his crab claw. 

There's more to the show than just that. You guys do realize that the food is a semi-McGuffin for the TV personalities to talk and that what they talk about is the emphasis, right? I mean, they still do care about the food that's made, but the personality is a big part as well. It's not a pure comedy show. It's a personality show with comedic elements.

Look, I personally don't care for it, but I understand it's appeal. People want to see personalities they recognize go out and do things, often with other personalities. They then get to live vicariously through them or enjoy their banter. It provides a sense of togetherness and they get to share in an experience. The "humor" is "safe" and done to make people feel more comfortable with each other. These shows are designed to be familiar friends to the viewer. You don't have to like it, but if you can't even understand it, either linguistically or in terms of the content and its audience appeal, then maybe you shouldn't be so harsh in your criticism since it's based on ignorance.

Look, I loved Seinfeld. Heck my handle on Gorf's short-lived site was frickin JonVoight'sCar. But for many Americans, particularly in the African-American, Latino, and Rural communities, Seinfeld was a complete nonevent and non-funny. It was rather culturally dependent and it didn't translate to all people. Roc, A Different World, and In Living Color were complete non-events that many people in shall we say, non-POC communities "didn't get" and dismissed, despite their excellence. Now in both cases there were plenty of people who defied demography and crossed over, but there are blind spots and this assumption that YOUR norms and standards are the default ones and the ones that you get to judge others with is incomplete at best. Like, it's not baseless, but boy can it be partially blind.

As for absolute standards that might defy cultural context, surely you don't enjoy anything that someone else might look down on? Sports? 3 stooges? Video games? Fast cars? Rock music? Wouldn't you get tired of someone who went on a general music forum and spent their entire time bashing rock and talking about how people who liked it were stupid and how it was trash culture?

The "I'm not into it, therefore it's stupid" mentality is one of the worst, most childish out there.

I'm not sure you need to be anything above basic level Korean to listen to Sam Hammington slurping on a crab claw and the dimwits in the studio saying '맛있겠다'.  All that involves is noises and a basic Korean phrase we hear 11 million times a day.  Culturally, we get it.  But it's totally on par with Seinfeld.  Knowing Martin's cultural dimwittery, surely he can see that Seinfeld is still considered a comedy great decades after it was shown, whereas I doubt in twenty years time people will still be remembering Sam Hammington slurping on his crab claw. 

This one?

https://youtu.be/L_wv8hNCYK0

This one?

https://youtu.be/L_wv8hNCYK0

no, that's Seinfeld

Look, if you're going to compare things, at least compare things you are capable of understanding because you are fluent in the language and can pick up on any cultural references and such. If you aren't even fluent in the language, the criticism becomes a bit hollow because there's no getting around this- Part of it is based on ignorance.

As for cultural relativism vs. absolutism that the absolutists fail to acknowledge, is that this game can go on forever. Bash Kpop and point to some hipster band? Then someone will compare the hipster band to classic rock. Then someone will compare that to classical music. Or take Seinfeld, "TV is such lowbrow entertainment, why aren't you reading Moliere?" And I'm sure there's some snob out there who poo-poos Moliere. You know those types exist and how insufferable they are.

If I don't like something, I don't like something. I may have my opinions on high vs. low entertainment and what constitutes it, and whether I enjoy various incarnations of it, but I'm not going to get bent out of shape over it. I'm pretty sure everyone here has something exceedingly dumb that they enjoy and others dismiss. Heck, I enjoy watching 22 people bash themselves to a pulp while tossing around a ball. I enjoy seeing two human beings smash each other inside a metal cage. I enjoy watching cars go around in circles at high speeds. I enjoy watching 3 men hit each, poke, and smack each other and make various strange noises. I enjoy watching a cartoon mouse horribly brutalize a cartoon cat. I enjoy listening to a person suffering from mental illness imploring the listener to engage in acts of carnality with various bioforms over a synthesized track. I enjoy telling some 8-bit human caricature to jump at certain times on the heads of mycological animations and assorted testudines.

Who the eff am I to judge so harshly?

Firstly, your arguments about cultural relativism always involve accusing people on the other side of getting angry about stuff when they usually aren't. You don't have to be insufferable or judge things harshly to discuss the relative merits of art forms. You don't have to do it all the time either but sometimes it's useful and necessary.

Secondly, yes of course the game can 'go on forever' just as the human search for truth does.  But without having this kind of discussion there'd be no use for humanities subjects at universities. How can you decide what to put on a syllabus when no art form is better than another. How can a professor recommend books to read on a subject when all ideas on the subject are of equal value?

You're probably going to say we're just talking about comedy which isn't important in the great scheme of things but there are actually university courses on comedy writing. On which presumably they have to create a syllabus based on what is good or not.  As a professor on a course like that would you be claiming a sketch of a fat guy slurping from a crab's leg was as good as say the 4 Yorkshiremen Monty Python sketch? 

Firstly, your arguments about cultural relativism always involve accusing people on the other side of getting angry about stuff when they usually aren't.

I'm not the one griping on the internet about what TV programs my wife and inlaws are watching. So yeah, actually they ARE angry. Not to mention the constant rants on here.

As a professor on a course like that would you be claiming a sketch of a fat guy slurping from a crab's leg was as good as say the 4 Yorkshiremen Monty Python sketch?

But here's the real rub- Let's start comparing stuff like A Different World or Living Single or In Living Color to Seinfeld or Friends or Monty Python. What's "Great" in that case is much more defined by our cultural upbringing and what we're familiar with (on average).

I would start by saying you're making an apples and oranges comparison. You're comparing a written, scripted situational comedy show vs. a semi-reality personality show with comedic elements. Seinfeld has a plot structure, this really doesn't. They have completely different target audiences and serve completely different purposes in providing entertainment. It's a bit like comparing a 3 minute rock song to a 90 minute mass. Both music, but distinctly different audiences and goals. Wouldn't the more appropriate comparison be more something like MTV's Cribs or like, a comedic version of The Real World or something like that? Not to mention, people seem to be using this one program as a stand-in for all Korean TV. Survivor is a wildly possible show, as was The Apprentice. Same with American Idol. I mean, one might question why Western audiences derive pleasure from watching a host berate someone to the point of tears, humiliating them in front of an entire country. OR one could say that's not necessarily a representative example and that sort of show has a target audience that is looking for that sort of thing.

What I'd do is look at other shows of that type and see how well it did compared to them. I'd try and follow the Roger Ebert style of criticism which is "Did it meet the audience's expectations?"  Yes there is some consideration for the absolute, but that is when it starts to veer into "Why doesn't this exist to make me happy?" and you have to be careful. A good evaluation of content should be able to consider the target audience and what they are seeking.

I mean, you haven't even listed any evaluative criteria.

How can you decide what to put on a syllabus when no art form is better than another. How can a professor recommend books to read on a subject when all ideas on the subject are of equal value?

I'd say historical influence and their popularity amongst the people of the period would be a good place to start. That's not a commentary on whether such work was "good", only that it was significant and influential and widely consumed.

I'm not the one griping on the internet about what TV programs my wife and inlaws are watching. So yeah, actually they ARE angry. Not to mention the constant rants on here.

Yes, the constant rants in the 'ranting thread'   

So you're doing something much worse because you're griping about somebody griping about some piss poor Korean tv that his wife and inlaws watching in the 'Ranting/Venting Thread'.  What does that make you?  You're getting angry about someone getting 'angry' (which knowing Oglop, he isn't) because you fail time and time again to see things like a normal person. You continually come across as someone who is devoid of any self-reflection or sense of humour and whose aim it is to 'win' some pointless internet 'war' that only you are taking seriously day in day out.  When you say someone else is 'angry', you really are only talking about yourself.  Simplez.   

Yes, the constant rants in the 'ranting thread'   

So you're doing something much worse because you're griping about somebody griping about some piss poor Korean tv that his wife and inlaws watching in the 'Ranting/Venting Thread'.  What does that make you?  You're getting angry about someone getting 'angry' (which knowing Oglop, he isn't) because you fail time and time again to see things like a normal person. You continually come across as someone who is devoid of any self-reflection or sense of humour and whose aim it is to 'win' some pointless internet 'war' that only you are taking seriously day in day out.  When you say someone else is 'angry', you really are only talking about yourself.  Simplez.   

Dude, I actually offered some advice on how to deal with it, not just for him, but for anyone else who might be stuck watching TV they don't like. Also, it started out sympathetic enough. Then you get the people who explode at "OMG 'Tino is equating Sam to Seinfeld!!!"

It's a forum where people come and talk about stuff. Calm down Ronnie.

Dude, I actually offered some advice on how to deal with it, not just for him, but for anyone else who might be stuck watching TV they don't like.

That was actually another example of you not behaving like a normal person. Everyone, except you, could see the guy was just sounding off and wasn't looking for advice.

Mate I was just having a little rant in the ranting thread. I'm not frothing at the mouth (unlike someone in here)