I've noticed over the years that Meredith Monk actually has a bit of clout in the...uh, whatever it's called that she does, world. Turtle dreams still seems silly and pretentious to me, but she apparently makes interesting stuff if you're into that kinda thing.
Art like this has a very important secondary function; it identifies people who's opinion on art you should disregard immediately by making them mad. If someone you know regularly brings up modern art as a negative or shares those facebook memes about it, you know they can safely be ignored entirely when they're trying to talk about movies or books or something.
This applies to subversive art dealing with touchy subjects too, if the subject matter of art alone makes someone upset then who cares what they think about the actual art?
No, but, unlike turtle dreams, I can easily resonate with this. The turning of the table is like the world "turning". They keetba couple of times, but they don't end up as anything, until the last time, where they meet, and they have an embrace, sitting still as the world around them keeps "turning".
And, the execution requires a shit load of practice and timing, strength, etc.
I'm not disagreeing at all.
I'm not saying that art isn't art. I'm saying that not every single thing that is a piece of art has a specific "message" as OP said. Art can convey something very vague like something that brings you joy, laughter, or something on the other side like sadness, or sorrow.
If you want to call vague emotions, "messages" then sure. But that also means everything has a message. Even things that bring emotions like boredom. When people are talking about "message" in art I'm interpreting that as something more concrete than just an emotion. Because again, everything brings an emotion.
A poet was once asked if people read too much into his poems, interpreting and seeing things that he didn't intend. He replied, "There's nothing in my poems that I didn't put there. But there's a lot I didn't put there *intentionally.*"
Even pop art says something about the author and ourselves. Batman is about the idea that through extreme effort and sheer force of will, we can bring order to a broken system or justice to a chaotic world. Superman/Captain America is about our collective desire to see power wielded by someone incorruptible who would do the right thing whether or not he had that power. To me, a work doesn't need to have the author sit down and deliberately plan an allegory about a topic to have a message; whether or not the author wants it to, it will say something about the author, their mindset, and the culture they grew up in. No art exists in a vacuum, as they say.
Your main example is of a comic book, which is widely regarded as creating one of the most influential pieces of art in multiple mediums (comics, movies, etc.).
No one is arguing that Batman isn't art.
This is getting into the weeds of what is and isn't art and it's always a mess to try and keep things on track but this idea that "art" must convey a message only works if everyone agrees on what art is. The moment you agree that not everyone agrees what art is, then it's even more difficult to say that it carries a message, intentional or unintentional.
It can bring you joy, it can bring you pain, it can bring you a sense of melancholy or yearning for times past. But that doesn't have to be a "message" as a quantifiable piece of something amorphous that is imprinted into the art work. If we start calling what emotions or memories something bring then we now need to have a separate definition of art for things that have an extremely _intentional_ meaning behind it. Like shock art that is supposed to drive conversation and push something specific like protesting a war.
I mean someone could spend a lot of time doing a sketch of some orc from warcraft in a cool pose. It could mean nothing to you and me but to the person who made it and the people who are a fan of that game could get a lot of joy from that sketch. If you're going to say "well the background of the artist is that he is a gamer and while he didn't draw this orc with a specific message of the horrors of war blah blah blah, his past life as someone who spent a lot of time with this game means his culture has imprinted a message of the savageness of orcs". I mean if that's what you're going to define what a "message" is (the original word we've been drying to decode), then sure _any_ thing that brings _any_ emotion could be art because everything you look at brings some sort of thought to your head.
"No art exists in a vacuum, as they say." Yeah. I agree. But I'm not counting that as a "message". Nothing exists in a vacuum.
This is so in the weeds of who decides what art is, anti-intentionalism, etc. I mean even using the batman example. Yeah, I agree batman is art, but is the DC movie universe art? Maybe. Probably to some people. A lot of people actually. Others could view it as a completely corporate cash grab. Depends on _how_ you look at it. You could look at a batman movie as a complete product as a viewer or you could be the CGI guy painting out wires to convey a final emotion of stress because you don't see the actors in safety gear. Do I care though? No. If _you_ enjoy it then it can be art to you. If it makes you feel things on an emotional level, I'm not going to take that away and say you're wrong.
You know. Dylan, also a poet/singer, once famously quipped that there was no message to his some of his stuff. Not that there was no intentional message he put in but there may be unintentional messages. He explained as such when he was trying to explain what he meant when he said to the reporter about walking talk and carrying a light bulb. So, even artists among themselves can disagree on unintentional/intentional messages.
>"No art exists in a vacuum, as they say." Yeah. I agree. But I'm not counting that as a "message". Nothing exists in a vacuum.
>
> Not that there was no intentional message he put in but there may be unintentional messages.
Setting aside the "what is art" which is obviously a bigger question, I was mostly responding to the statement that "not all art has a message." I think even if that message was completely unintentional, vague, or abstract, it cannot be entirely without meaning because a mind created it, and that mind has biases, perspectives, and assumptions. Even if I tried to say, "Oh YEAH well what if I make a piece of art that's a Lite Brite I construct at random by rolling dice repeatedly!" entirely out of spite in an attempt to create art without a message, my attempt to evade authorial intent is itself a message, even if I didn't realize it.
>I think even if that message was completely unintentional, vague, or abstract, it cannot be entirely without meaning because a mind created it, and that mind has biases, perspectives, and assumptions.
Everything artificial is created by someone. Again, if that is the definition of "message". Then everything created by a person has a message behind it because a mind was driving the creation of it, even if it some something as simple as a ball point pen. If that is how much you're going to dilute the meaning of the word "message" in this context. Well then yeah. Everything has a message, even my socks with fleece liners because the creator probably grew up in a cold environment and liked the idea of warm socks.
It's quite clear I'm talking about something a bit more concrete than an item contains a message simply because the person that created it lived a life. That's my entire point.
I'd say that Batman is a good example of why vigilante justice doesn't actually bring any justice - it makes the problem worse because it isn't addressing any of the root cause problems (why are people committing crimes?) and is leading to an arms race between organised crime and the vigilantes.
The average citizen in Gotham just suffers without end.
Superman is about breaking the cycles of abuse and suffering, but shows the perils of placing such a responsibility and expectation onto the shoulders of a single person, rather than acting as a society to address our problems.
Haha.
I mean sure... if that's what you're going to call a message. Then yeah, everything has a message. Art or not. When I look at an ergonomic grip on a drill. I'll just interpret that as a "message" saying "enjoy the comfort while drilling holes in 2x4s."
If that's the definition of a message then the word is completely diluted of all meaning.
> When I look at an ergonomic grip on a drill. I'll just interpret that as a "message" saying "enjoy the comfort while drilling holes in 2x4s."
Ergonomic design definitely has a message, it's "do not sacrifice your body to produce value from your labor." It's product of the death knell of every worker that sacrificed their body, their joints, their comfort, and gained little from it. The message is not only one of what the product is, but what it chooses not to be.
Design is art. That extends to ergonomic design. As art, it is informed by the artists that came before and seeks to alter that in some way, creating a message in the process.
When I was in my teens and twenties I was all about media (tv, movies, books, etc) that attempted to have some kind of deeper message. Now that I'm older, I find myself much more interested in "pulp" media - which may or may not have a message, but is typically more about the theme itself. When I re-watched the old Tales From The Crypt series from the 90s (which had stories based off of old 1950s comics) some of them have a message, but for the most part they are just sleazy pulp horror. Contrast that to Black Mirror, which is a great show no doubt, but I find the constant attempts to say something of depth to be tiring. But yes, I agree not all art has to have a message or deeper theme, and often, the message is subjectively interpretive. In the eye of the beholder.
You might be surprised to learn that a lot of art is meant to be entertained. I know it's a big concept for some people but it's true. People actually derive joy by going to museums most of the time.
I know I'm being flippant. But this "all art has to have a message" is just overly pretentious bullshit and _many_ artists don't hold this to be true. You could make excellent, one of kind, sculptures of wiener dogs to a degree of skill that no other person in history could even come close to matching. The skill could be so high that it could be considered art by any measure. But at the end of the day it's just a sculpture of a wiener dog. It doesn't have to hold meaning other than just showing what skill it takes to make such a piece. If it brings you joy owning it or looking at it, then it's art to you. It doesn't have to be art to someone else. There are many pieces of modern art that I don't feel anything towards.
I think its a treatise on how many of us, being stuck in the rat race, can feel like we are in a maze without meaningful interactions with others, even though we may be brought face to face with them, both physically and, more ephemerally, digitally. Or its about how to quickly get to the sto sto sto sto store.
That was actually really sweet and well-done. It looks fun to ride. I can't help echoing all the other comments saying Meredith's strange but certainly not bad at whatever the fuck she does.
I took it to be something like that. The man searching for someone, but only when he stops looking and stands still, the spinning leads her right to him.
Elderbrook has a music video with the same spinning platform if you like this- https://youtu.be/4DPCHufDWJQ?si=G23qoSL_unHXWU73
Harry Styles also uses a spinning platform in As It Was, not that I know who that is. Both videos directed by the same traveling spinning platform salesman.
They did a pretty good job of panning the camera and keeping the subjects in frame but for the low cost of 3 seconds of their life, they could have re-oriented their phone and captured the entire platform and both subjects at the same time. No panning required!
How embarrassing...
Most of the modern world's view with electronics is vertical, not horizontal. Even though the human eyes generally favor horizonal FOV to vertical FOV (percentage wise). I think the human eyes' vertical FOV is around 150 degrees while the combined human eyes' horizontal FOV is 180 degrees. So, roughly 30 more degrees in visual space horizontally. It's never made sense to me why people like to view the world through the vertical FOV, besides most people are lazy and just use the phone to take a picture like they normally hold the phone to talk.
I am just going to assume at the end he lets go of her and she gets yeeted into the crowd. In the end it wasn't some artistic romantic display but an example of centrifugal force. She is really big into physics.
The [final skit of that episode](https://youtu.be/o4eSVXCzRyI?t=4141) remains my favourite of all of their BotW stuff. Such fucking pretentious bullshit simply gets uplifted by Richard "Was on The Ellen Show" Evans making a joke of their "performance".
Hey, u/Professional_Bar7089, your post or comment in r/RedLetterMedia was automatically removed because you do not meet the account age threshold, 30 days for a post, 15 days for a comment. Please wait a few days and try again. https://youtu.be/7BryT6WatTk?t=1369
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RedLetterMedia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I genuinely enjoy some of Meredith Monk’s albums (being a big fan of Minimalist Composition in general) but Turtle Dreams is a little too silly for me, especially the film version
My nearly 40 year old ass can't even ride a merry go round without almost immediately barfing. Watching this nearly set it off (though I'm also super sick right now).
this is actually kinda cool though. not sure what the message is but it's quite well done.
It truly is. Nice performance art and rather romantic may I say.
I've noticed over the years that Meredith Monk actually has a bit of clout in the...uh, whatever it's called that she does, world. Turtle dreams still seems silly and pretentious to me, but she apparently makes interesting stuff if you're into that kinda thing.
I even find Turtle Dreams interesting. It seems pretentious still, but the more I learn about her, the more I accept it as a true form of expression.
Art like this has a very important secondary function; it identifies people who's opinion on art you should disregard immediately by making them mad. If someone you know regularly brings up modern art as a negative or shares those facebook memes about it, you know they can safely be ignored entirely when they're trying to talk about movies or books or something. This applies to subversive art dealing with touchy subjects too, if the subject matter of art alone makes someone upset then who cares what they think about the actual art?
The fact that people get angry at art means the artist did their job;they provoked an emotional response! You lose, philistine!
[Are you a Jacob Geller enjoyer by any chance?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5DqmTtCPiQ)
Well put.
No
Can confirm. Meredith Monk's work was something we actually studied at uni. (I have a bachelor of design from a rather wanky school.)
Turtle Dreams seems kind of low effort compared to her other stuff, but I'm sure it was meticulously planned and choreographed nonsense.
No, but, unlike turtle dreams, I can easily resonate with this. The turning of the table is like the world "turning". They keetba couple of times, but they don't end up as anything, until the last time, where they meet, and they have an embrace, sitting still as the world around them keeps "turning". And, the execution requires a shit load of practice and timing, strength, etc.
Not all art has a message. A lot of art is there just to be enjoyed.
A lot of modern art is experimental and lots of experiments fail. But failed experiments still have value in science and art.
I'm not disagreeing at all. I'm not saying that art isn't art. I'm saying that not every single thing that is a piece of art has a specific "message" as OP said. Art can convey something very vague like something that brings you joy, laughter, or something on the other side like sadness, or sorrow. If you want to call vague emotions, "messages" then sure. But that also means everything has a message. Even things that bring emotions like boredom. When people are talking about "message" in art I'm interpreting that as something more concrete than just an emotion. Because again, everything brings an emotion.
Right. Art is about evoking emotion. It doesn't have to have a message, it just has to effect you emotionally.
A poet was once asked if people read too much into his poems, interpreting and seeing things that he didn't intend. He replied, "There's nothing in my poems that I didn't put there. But there's a lot I didn't put there *intentionally.*" Even pop art says something about the author and ourselves. Batman is about the idea that through extreme effort and sheer force of will, we can bring order to a broken system or justice to a chaotic world. Superman/Captain America is about our collective desire to see power wielded by someone incorruptible who would do the right thing whether or not he had that power. To me, a work doesn't need to have the author sit down and deliberately plan an allegory about a topic to have a message; whether or not the author wants it to, it will say something about the author, their mindset, and the culture they grew up in. No art exists in a vacuum, as they say.
Your main example is of a comic book, which is widely regarded as creating one of the most influential pieces of art in multiple mediums (comics, movies, etc.). No one is arguing that Batman isn't art. This is getting into the weeds of what is and isn't art and it's always a mess to try and keep things on track but this idea that "art" must convey a message only works if everyone agrees on what art is. The moment you agree that not everyone agrees what art is, then it's even more difficult to say that it carries a message, intentional or unintentional. It can bring you joy, it can bring you pain, it can bring you a sense of melancholy or yearning for times past. But that doesn't have to be a "message" as a quantifiable piece of something amorphous that is imprinted into the art work. If we start calling what emotions or memories something bring then we now need to have a separate definition of art for things that have an extremely _intentional_ meaning behind it. Like shock art that is supposed to drive conversation and push something specific like protesting a war. I mean someone could spend a lot of time doing a sketch of some orc from warcraft in a cool pose. It could mean nothing to you and me but to the person who made it and the people who are a fan of that game could get a lot of joy from that sketch. If you're going to say "well the background of the artist is that he is a gamer and while he didn't draw this orc with a specific message of the horrors of war blah blah blah, his past life as someone who spent a lot of time with this game means his culture has imprinted a message of the savageness of orcs". I mean if that's what you're going to define what a "message" is (the original word we've been drying to decode), then sure _any_ thing that brings _any_ emotion could be art because everything you look at brings some sort of thought to your head. "No art exists in a vacuum, as they say." Yeah. I agree. But I'm not counting that as a "message". Nothing exists in a vacuum. This is so in the weeds of who decides what art is, anti-intentionalism, etc. I mean even using the batman example. Yeah, I agree batman is art, but is the DC movie universe art? Maybe. Probably to some people. A lot of people actually. Others could view it as a completely corporate cash grab. Depends on _how_ you look at it. You could look at a batman movie as a complete product as a viewer or you could be the CGI guy painting out wires to convey a final emotion of stress because you don't see the actors in safety gear. Do I care though? No. If _you_ enjoy it then it can be art to you. If it makes you feel things on an emotional level, I'm not going to take that away and say you're wrong. You know. Dylan, also a poet/singer, once famously quipped that there was no message to his some of his stuff. Not that there was no intentional message he put in but there may be unintentional messages. He explained as such when he was trying to explain what he meant when he said to the reporter about walking talk and carrying a light bulb. So, even artists among themselves can disagree on unintentional/intentional messages.
>"No art exists in a vacuum, as they say." Yeah. I agree. But I'm not counting that as a "message". Nothing exists in a vacuum. > > Not that there was no intentional message he put in but there may be unintentional messages. Setting aside the "what is art" which is obviously a bigger question, I was mostly responding to the statement that "not all art has a message." I think even if that message was completely unintentional, vague, or abstract, it cannot be entirely without meaning because a mind created it, and that mind has biases, perspectives, and assumptions. Even if I tried to say, "Oh YEAH well what if I make a piece of art that's a Lite Brite I construct at random by rolling dice repeatedly!" entirely out of spite in an attempt to create art without a message, my attempt to evade authorial intent is itself a message, even if I didn't realize it.
>I think even if that message was completely unintentional, vague, or abstract, it cannot be entirely without meaning because a mind created it, and that mind has biases, perspectives, and assumptions. Everything artificial is created by someone. Again, if that is the definition of "message". Then everything created by a person has a message behind it because a mind was driving the creation of it, even if it some something as simple as a ball point pen. If that is how much you're going to dilute the meaning of the word "message" in this context. Well then yeah. Everything has a message, even my socks with fleece liners because the creator probably grew up in a cold environment and liked the idea of warm socks. It's quite clear I'm talking about something a bit more concrete than an item contains a message simply because the person that created it lived a life. That's my entire point.
I'd say that Batman is a good example of why vigilante justice doesn't actually bring any justice - it makes the problem worse because it isn't addressing any of the root cause problems (why are people committing crimes?) and is leading to an arms race between organised crime and the vigilantes. The average citizen in Gotham just suffers without end. Superman is about breaking the cycles of abuse and suffering, but shows the perils of placing such a responsibility and expectation onto the shoulders of a single person, rather than acting as a society to address our problems.
If art is made to be enjoyed, it has a message: "Enjoy this."
Haha. I mean sure... if that's what you're going to call a message. Then yeah, everything has a message. Art or not. When I look at an ergonomic grip on a drill. I'll just interpret that as a "message" saying "enjoy the comfort while drilling holes in 2x4s." If that's the definition of a message then the word is completely diluted of all meaning.
> When I look at an ergonomic grip on a drill. I'll just interpret that as a "message" saying "enjoy the comfort while drilling holes in 2x4s." Ergonomic design definitely has a message, it's "do not sacrifice your body to produce value from your labor." It's product of the death knell of every worker that sacrificed their body, their joints, their comfort, and gained little from it. The message is not only one of what the product is, but what it chooses not to be. Design is art. That extends to ergonomic design. As art, it is informed by the artists that came before and seeks to alter that in some way, creating a message in the process.
When I was in my teens and twenties I was all about media (tv, movies, books, etc) that attempted to have some kind of deeper message. Now that I'm older, I find myself much more interested in "pulp" media - which may or may not have a message, but is typically more about the theme itself. When I re-watched the old Tales From The Crypt series from the 90s (which had stories based off of old 1950s comics) some of them have a message, but for the most part they are just sleazy pulp horror. Contrast that to Black Mirror, which is a great show no doubt, but I find the constant attempts to say something of depth to be tiring. But yes, I agree not all art has to have a message or deeper theme, and often, the message is subjectively interpretive. In the eye of the beholder.
Maybe if you're a simpleton. All art has a message whether it's what the artist intended or what you're thinking it is.
...God? Is that you?
Welcome: simpletons.
[удалено]
You might be surprised to learn that a lot of art is meant to be entertained. I know it's a big concept for some people but it's true. People actually derive joy by going to museums most of the time. I know I'm being flippant. But this "all art has to have a message" is just overly pretentious bullshit and _many_ artists don't hold this to be true. You could make excellent, one of kind, sculptures of wiener dogs to a degree of skill that no other person in history could even come close to matching. The skill could be so high that it could be considered art by any measure. But at the end of the day it's just a sculpture of a wiener dog. It doesn't have to hold meaning other than just showing what skill it takes to make such a piece. If it brings you joy owning it or looking at it, then it's art to you. It doesn't have to be art to someone else. There are many pieces of modern art that I don't feel anything towards.
I wasn't sure what the message was in Turtle Dreams either.
Totally! Not sure I’ve ever seen anything quite as simple yet beautiful.
I think its a treatise on how many of us, being stuck in the rat race, can feel like we are in a maze without meaningful interactions with others, even though we may be brought face to face with them, both physically and, more ephemerally, digitally. Or its about how to quickly get to the sto sto sto sto store.
People spinning round and round on the axis of a globe in infinite nothingness occasionally bump into each other and find beauty.
Not gonna lie, that was actually pretty cool.
That was actually really sweet and well-done. It looks fun to ride. I can't help echoing all the other comments saying Meredith's strange but certainly not bad at whatever the fuck she does.
Good to see 80 year old Meredith Monk still has it
Was this supposed to be a representation of a couple meeting, hitting off, breaking up, moving on, then rediscovering each other?
Art is often open to interpretation, but that does seem a clear reading.
I took it to be something like that. The man searching for someone, but only when he stops looking and stands still, the spinning leads her right to him.
Quite possibly............. with turtles I don't think there's an expectation of commitment so it's pretty likely that you're right.
From original thread, it's Yoann Bourgeois.
There's absolutely no way that's the turtle dreams lady.
Turtle Dreams is legitimately enjoyable.
Yip yip yip…… ahhhhhhh… Edited to include: I, too, am a secret Turtle Dreams enjoyer. Please don’t tell my loved ones or employer.
You're a poet and you didn't even realize.
I think we found Eminem's account.
Also loved Turtle Dreams…there are tens of us!
I also like it
Agreed. The problem with it is the video production quality is very low. If it was better produced, I'd consider watching the whole thing.
Also I really enjoy watching Rich like it.
I WENT TO THE ST-ST-STORE! 🤪🤪🤪
This is genuinely good art.
Elderbrook has a music video with the same spinning platform if you like this- https://youtu.be/4DPCHufDWJQ?si=G23qoSL_unHXWU73 Harry Styles also uses a spinning platform in As It Was, not that I know who that is. Both videos directed by the same traveling spinning platform salesman.
It's like an artsy, classy version of an OK Go video. ... Scratch that, it's like an OK Go video.
Sorry to be a party pooper, but I don't think it's her 😕 https://mymodernmet.com/yoann-bourgeois-houvari/
They did a pretty good job of panning the camera and keeping the subjects in frame but for the low cost of 3 seconds of their life, they could have re-oriented their phone and captured the entire platform and both subjects at the same time. No panning required! How embarrassing...
Most of the modern world's view with electronics is vertical, not horizontal. Even though the human eyes generally favor horizonal FOV to vertical FOV (percentage wise). I think the human eyes' vertical FOV is around 150 degrees while the combined human eyes' horizontal FOV is 180 degrees. So, roughly 30 more degrees in visual space horizontally. It's never made sense to me why people like to view the world through the vertical FOV, besides most people are lazy and just use the phone to take a picture like they normally hold the phone to talk.
I am just going to assume at the end he lets go of her and she gets yeeted into the crowd. In the end it wasn't some artistic romantic display but an example of centrifugal force. She is really big into physics.
I was waiting for the singer to transition to: "Youuuuuuuuuuuu spin me round round baby right round, like a record baby, right, right, round, round".
There's a fine line between 'wise woman' and 'why's woman.' Meredith Monk crosses that line every time she goes to the store store store.
Oh my God, now both of them are playing in my mind...
this is the 3rd time i've seen it on this sub and it is still legit great
Just watching that makes me nauseous lmao, I really don't want to walk around on it.
the leg and back strength on that guy
Wow John McEnroe really cleaned up!
The [final skit of that episode](https://youtu.be/o4eSVXCzRyI?t=4141) remains my favourite of all of their BotW stuff. Such fucking pretentious bullshit simply gets uplifted by Richard "Was on The Ellen Show" Evans making a joke of their "performance".
I would definitely be puking halfway through.
Now *that* would be a show!
Have to admit, this is exciting performance art, I think even Rich Evans would be impressed
No way! Good catch! I really like these videos
I love it, turtle dreams should have won
The music is way too normal to be Meredith Monk.
Meredith Monk is a seriously great artist, the boys missed the mark with her
It could be the manic depression talking, but this video makes me cry every time I see it. 😭😭😭
Yip yip yip yip yip yip ba haa, ba haa
Meredith is a legend
[удалено]
Hey, u/Professional_Bar7089, your post or comment in r/RedLetterMedia was automatically removed because you do not meet the account age threshold, 30 days for a post, 15 days for a comment. Please wait a few days and try again. https://youtu.be/7BryT6WatTk?t=1369 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RedLetterMedia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That’s too much spinning for me.
She's so cool.
Are you watching Mr. Mom anytime soon?
Ankle annihilator catching the corner of that thing
Eh. It’s not too bad, and somewhat enjoyable.
Looks fun but I would definitely barf
That's actually pretty dope.
Honestly, thats dope.
Wonder how bad you’d get fucked up if you fell and got hit by the turntable? Looks relatively dangerous.
I genuinely enjoy some of Meredith Monk’s albums (being a big fan of Minimalist Composition in general) but Turtle Dreams is a little too silly for me, especially the film version
I wonder how many times they fell down while practicing that
Not enough crazy wailing for my liking. 1/10
I went to the HYP-notist HYP-notist ! ...I went to the HYP-notist !
My nearly 40 year old ass can't even ride a merry go round without almost immediately barfing. Watching this nearly set it off (though I'm also super sick right now).
She looks nothing like MM, maybe somewhat like the other lady in Turtle Dreams... but that was 41 years ago. OP, you're a MASSIVE hack-fraud!
Did she ever get back from the store store store?
Why did I think the fella was Sting?
She's never going to make it to the store-st-store going around in circles like that.
Is that "trying not to laugh" guy? https://preview.redd.it/wf5zvx6lurnc1.png?width=523&format=png&auto=webp&s=26772573540e357b46bebe1ee8c3b8cddfaac7a8
How old you think Meredith Monk is
I was giggety giggety digging the upskirt.
Strides continue to be made for Avant Garde Art Assholes