Atticus

The dude that played Bones was so fucking Bones

I KNOW!!

I thought - out of all the actors - Karl Urban had nailed his role the best. He got the sense of Bones' exasperation across without descending into parody. I thought that was the most difficult role to play out of the big 3, but wished the film had been more Kirk-Bones-Spock, rather than Kirk-Spock show it ended up.

Hope Into Darkness does more with the trio.

Caught ...... Star Trek over the weekend

The JJ Abrams one? Is that the first you've seen it? I am shocked, Lou. Such a brilliant movie, and an excellent re-boot.

(also a wee bit jealous in a strange way - would love to be able to see it for the first time again).

Still not quite as good as STII:TWOK though, but oh so near.

I didn't have a Guinness yesterday. But I did have a piece of very lovely chocolate Guinness cake, baked with care by Mrs Atticus.

I don't know anything about guitars, but that sure does look pretty.

How's the sustain?

Oh aye, he's football daft at the minute. Still not absolutely to grips with the finer points but he's defintely into it in a big way. Plays in the garden with the football until it's too dark to see a thing.

He's more interested (and more knowledgeable) than I was at 6. And he's already seen some silverware lifted - I didn't see that till I was 17!

Went to the Scottish League Cup final yesterday. I was surprised by a pretty thrilling match that saw St Mirren come back from an early Hearts goal to win 3-2.

Took my son with me and we both had a great afternoon. Total opposite of when we were there for the semi-final: good performances, some great goals, no play-acting or winding up from players. And brilliant result that sees St Mirren lift their first major trophy for 25 years.

It restored my faith in the standard of Scottish football.

If you have access to BBC iPlayer I'd recommend tracking down the highlights, if you like that sort of thing - BBC1 Scotland, Sunday 10.35, Sportscene.

Take something from Jack Kirby's Fourth World. Just to see how he reacts.

You can believe that art is a stuffed bird of paradise all you like, Hugh, but I'm more convinced it's a canary in a coal mine.

I have no idea if this is being dismissive or supportive.But hey, it's catchy.

I'm dubious that anything can possess "the same turbulent storm of potential meaning that distinguishes any worthwhile work of art" and still be quite useless.

I agree. The point that was being made in the quote I provided was that if something is not useless it will not contain the same potential meaning. If a work of art is "useless" in the way that Wilde meant, then - if it is a "good" work of art - its qualities consist largely of this concealed, implied and inferred meaning. If it additionally has a function, the capacity for this meaning is obviously reduced but not entirely removed.

(I'd also question that practical objects can't be artworks as well: there's plenty of cars and fountain pens that can make a better case to being art than some contextless piece of frippery from somebody who's incapable of moving beyond what they picked up at Goldsmiths.)

I also did question that practical objects cannot be artworks, although your examples lean more towards the "art" of doing something well, like a craftsman. I don't think I've ever looked at a car and felt a desire to explore further what the designer might have been trying to convey with his work. Unless that intention was to imply the owner has a small cock. But maybe others have, and maybe I'm being too dismissive. I don't think I'm necessarily correct, but that's my view at the moment. Things change.

On the whole, while practical objects can contain elements of art, one of the facets of art for me is that it could be considered outside the realms of practical. Expressing emotions, elaborating on a landscape, using a material in different ways.

Making a building look a bit nicer.

But the fundamental role of the building would barely be diminished by a lack of frippery or plain walls.

I agree. Architecture must have artistic elements or qualities to be considered great; to express more than just the functional aspect. Even the great modernist deisgns take the maxim of "form follows function" and manage to transcend the utilitarian to become 3 dimesional works of art too. The Reitweld Schroder House, and Gerrit Reitweld's Red & Blue Chair are nothing if not 3D expressions of De Stijl principles. Take that expression away and they would continue to be a house and a chair, but it would in no way enrich the experience of the users.

I take the view that if someone is trying to express themselves, their thoughts, their ideas, or their beliefs through a non-literal medium, and their aim is to create a work of art, then it is art. Whether it is good art or poor art is a subjective opinion, even if it shared by the majority. At least one person - the artist - will have a different opinion.

To draw a comparison: if someone has a story they want to tell, and has it published (even self published) in a bound (or even a digital) format, the they have written a story. It may be the worst story ever written, and it may make no sense and have no positive qualities whatsoever - but it will still be a story.

Wow. This thread has been derailed big time, hasn't it?

I thought so too. But then I rationalised it by telling myself that in this post-apocalyptic world a number of charismatic, eccentric and outlandish characters would undoubtably rise to positions of power & prominence by virtue of providing a figurehead.

With regard to what is and what isn't art, there was a rather succinct quote from Jonathon Jones in the Guardian on Wednesday when he was writing about Thomas Heatherwick:

"If there is one thing that defines art across the ages, from an Ice Age sculpture of a bison to the work of Rachel Whiteread, it is an attempt to communicate meanings beyond the obvious. Art is something that initially makes no sense (or that has a much richer meaning than strikes you at first). It is distanced from practical problems and wanders off into realms of inner vision. "All art is quite useless," said Oscar Wilde. This is not the flip statement it appears. If something is a practical object, it rarely harbours the same turbulent storm of potential meaning that distinguishes any worthwhile work of art."

While I would generally disagree with the last sentence - I believe good architecture is art, for example, even though for it to be good it must also be functional - I also believe it's factually correct: even the Glasgow School of Art, or Mies' Barcelona Pavillion, our Gaudi's Sagrada Familia do not contain "the same turbulent storm of potential meaning that distinguishes any worthwhile work of art"

Batman #18 was solid enough, but didn’t have the emotional punch of Batman & Robin #18.

Did anyone else notice the

on the last panel of page 7 of B&R #18?

Is this the first reference on the New 52?

EDIT: Nope, I was wrong. It isn't the right outfit. Must be Jason's.

Is bok choy the same as pak choi? I know a lot of chinese food gets mixed up in translation.

Anyway, if it is I do love some of that myself. I cook a nice sticky ginger chicken with stir fried pak choi & sesame. Lovely.

holy fuck Atticus I am about to crack it right now

Ah, but you should also remember, I cry watching The Sixth Sense and reading The Time Traveller's Wife. So perhaps my weeping isn't the best barometer of quality

Batman & Robin #18

Just read it. If you don't read another comic this month, read this one.

Possibly - and only a time of reflection will tell - just possibly this could be the best single issue of a comic I've read.

I cried. On the train, not in the privacy of my own home.

Saw that yesterday. Brilliant that he didn't even have to turn up at the troll's door for him to totally shite it.

That piece says they don't know how he tracked the guy down. According to the Guardian he offered f £1000 to any of his followers that could track down the guy's address. He has thousands of followers.

Sorry to hear about Pippin. That's terrible news. Hope in time you can remember all the fun you had with him, and put it above the grief you feel now.

At least the big two (and Dark Horse. And IDW. And most of the indies) actually pay their creators a page rate up front.

The creators get paid up front? Christ, now I know why so many comics are late.

See when you're doing your ice rink next year? There's you chance.

I declare a love for the very fat, very unhealthy lunch I just had.

A roll & sausage, a roll & black pudding, and roll & bacon & fried potato scone. All with plenty of brown sauce.

Now, if you don't mind I'm going to sit here and see if I can feel my arteries clogging up.

Oh, so you want one of US to show you that we got your "king swapping places with rook" chess pun?

Who do you think you are, the fucking Riddler? :wink:

(aye, well I knew it was something to do with chess involving the rook, but I had to Google it. Oh, well done sir.)

Tony Stark had his back broken, and was then put in cryogenic storage before being brought back to life fully healed.

 

Bruce Wayne got over his broken back.

 

In comics it's like influenza.

Or death.

Point taken. Still a lot of dependancy on an operator or a decision maker of some kind, but I see where it's going.

Don't know about everyone else, but I quite fancy Batman Year Zero.

They're keeping the whole murdered parents bits and the Year One as it exists, so I can't say I object. Unless it turns out to be shit.

I've never tried curling, and probably never will, and I only ever watch it at the winter Olympics. But I do feel a great affection for the game as one of the few Scottish sports.

Good luck anyway! Hope your stones always find the button.

I enjoyed that a great deal.

Admittedly, I enjoyed it most for a few moments after

That said, it was still a good finale & I appreciated the closing shots of each character's posessions. As far as