Stop Comparing them!

[CloakedOne]

I must say it's really annoying when people compare great people with internet nobodies that are nowhere near their level of talent. When it comes to art, literature, and music, there are a lot of worthwhile things that people bring out on the internet, don't get me wrong, but it's when people say that " '_______' is on par with" say, Beethoven or Hemingway. Now I'm not saying that no one could ever be as good as them, there should always be room for the next generation of great thoughts and worthwhile art, but it really annoys me when such comparisons come from people that LIKE art, literature, and/or music but don't actually KNOW a great deal about the craft(s). If they did, they'd know that a person who makes something that is pleasing to them does not necessarily make it good: it just means that you like them (and yes, there is a level of quality when it comes to the fine arts, it's not completely subjective because you can dislike a piece that is structurally/conceptually great).

How about it escapists: who else unjustifiably compares someone/themselves to someone or something that is great?

 

[RaphaelsRedemption]

Well, I always snigger when the judges of the latest Austalia/America/Britain's Got Talent hails a "new superstar". A "true genius", no less! True, that person may have great talent, but I honestly don't think their talent should be any match for great practice and perserverance, like say, musicians in an orchestra, or performers in a circus.

Talent is one thing, but I respect practice and determination far more.

 

[CloakedOne]

Can you fill in the blank? I only hate when bad bands (Blink 182, Nickelback, Kings of Leon) get compared to good bands (Beatles, Rolling Stones, Strokes).

And when unproven American football players get anointed as the second coming of Joe Montana or Barry Sanders when they haven't played a down in the NFL. Look at Reggie Bush's productivity compared to his expectations? Good player, yes. Football Jesus, no.

Sorry about not being more specific, my question was more about the general topic and not so much a pointed attack ^_^;; thanks for your comments, though, I didn't even think to consider the sports industry (and I definitely should have)

 

[DefunctTheory]

Its just exaggerating to make a point. Damn... if I didn't exaggerate... I wouldn't be me.

Try not to take it so seriously.

 

[Layz92]

I wish they would stop comparing literature to Shakespeare. Usually because they proclaim Shakespeare to be some gargantuan of a writer, and when reviewing others say things like "the author was almost shakespearian in his writing". Sakespeare was alright for his time but I have read a couple and found them supremely average. Let it go people find a new master. Maybe Tolstoy, who knows.

 

[DeadlyYellow]

Spoiler: Well, I'm bigger than Jesus.

Seriously, he was like what? 5' and 130 lbs?

 

[MellowFellow]

Can you fill in the blank? I only hate when bad bands (Blink 182, Nickelback, Kings of Leon) get compared to good bands (Beatles, Rolling Stones, Strokes).

And when unproven American football players get anointed as the second coming of Joe Montana or Barry Sanders when they haven't played a down in the NFL. Look at Reggie Bush's productivity compared to his expectations? Good player, yes. Football Jesus, no.

Kind of like how everyone thinks Lebron is the next Michael Jordan?

I always hate it when people try to compare people nowadays to legends in whatever sport, music or whatever somebody does. Let people forge their own legend. In sports, I feel people need to stop comparing today's athletes to the greats like Babe Ruth, Michael Jordan, Joe Montana, etc.

 

[Mr.Pandah]

I have to say, I don't particularly know anyone that actually compares someone else or themselves to anyone else(thankfully) that is better than them. It is done jokingly, to exaggerate the fact that they are pretty good, but never serious enough to be taken to heart. I mean, I think I'm awesome at video games, but I'm not going to compare myself to some South Korean fellow(nor would I even want to be compared to one, since they do nothing but play video games.)

 

[BlindMessiah94]

I wish they would stop comparing literature to Shakespeare. Usually because they proclaim him to be some gargantuan of a writer, saying things like "the author was almost shakespearian in his writing". He was alright for his time but I have read a couple and found them supremely average. Let it go people find a new master. Maybe Tolstoy, who knows.

Who says this? I am hard pressed to remember a review in the past decade that flat out claims someone to be as good as shakespeare in writing. That seems like reviewer suicide to me.

Do people borrow shakespeare's ideas? Of course, all the time.

I really don't think this thread has a lot of merit as I see no real examples, and honestly until I do I'm calling bs.

Usually classic composers, writers, etc have earned their hallmark in time and are not so easily compared to modern artists who have not been around for more than a few years. It is tough to compare timeless artists to newcomers because newcomers haven't been around as long. Give their art 50 years. If it is still acclaimed then maybe you can start making the comparison. But in all honesty I seriously can't think of any review I've read that would be dumb enough to compare even talented established artists like Hans Zimmer to the likes of lets say Beethoven.

 

[Layz92]

I wish they would stop comparing literature to Shakespeare. Usually because they proclaim him to be some gargantuan of a writer, saying things like "the author was almost shakespearian in his writing". He was alright for his time but I have read a couple and found them supremely average. Let it go people find a new master. Maybe Tolstoy, who knows.

Who says this? I am hard pressed to remember a review in the past decade that flat out claims someone to be as good as shakespeare in writing. That seems like reviewer suicide to me.

Do people borrow shakespeare's ideas? Of course, all the time.

I really don't think this thread has a lot of merit as I see no real examples, and honestly until I do I'm calling bs.

Usually classic composers, writers, etc have earned their hallmark in time and are not so easily compared to modern artists who have not been around for more than a few years. It is tough to compare timeless artists to newcomers because newcomers haven't been around as long. Give their art 50 years. If it is still acclaimed then maybe you can start making the comparison. But in all honesty I seriously can't think of any review I've read that would be dumb enough to compare even talented established artists like Hans Zimmer to the likes of lets say Beethoven.

Maybe I didn't write my thought clear enough so check out my edited one if you feel like it. I was saying that reviewers (I hear them on the radio sometimes) think of shakespeare as some unattainable height but sometimes say "was almost as good as shakespeare"

 

[BlindMessiah94]

I wish they would stop comparing literature to Shakespeare. Usually because they proclaim him to be some gargantuan of a writer, saying things like "the author was almost shakespearian in his writing". He was alright for his time but I have read a couple and found them supremely average. Let it go people find a new master. Maybe Tolstoy, who knows.

Who says this? I am hard pressed to remember a review in the past decade that flat out claims someone to be as good as shakespeare in writing. That seems like reviewer suicide to me.

Do people borrow shakespeare's ideas? Of course, all the time.

I really don't think this thread has a lot of merit as I see no real examples, and honestly until I do I'm calling bs.

Usually classic composers, writers, etc have earned their hallmark in time and are not so easily compared to modern artists who have not been around for more than a few years. It is tough to compare timeless artists to newcomers because newcomers haven't been around as long. Give their art 50 years. If it is still acclaimed then maybe you can start making the comparison. But in all honesty I seriously can't think of any review I've read that would be dumb enough to compare even talented established artists like Hans Zimmer to the likes of lets say Beethoven.

Maybe I didn't write my thought clear enough so check out my edited one if you feel like it. I was saying that reviewers (I hear them on the radio sometimes) think of shakespeare as some unattainable height but sometimes say "was almost as good as shakespeare"

I think that's a bit dumb, you are right, Shakespeare isn't the pinnacle of writing. He created, or probably more accurately popularized a lot of the literary devices used today - dramatic irony, the tragic hero, etc. These ideas get borrowed, altered, butchered, improved upon, and everything in between by anyone who is a writer. He basically gave us a working framework to draw from. But that's not to say all his writing is sublime. He has a lot of plays. Some are just...terrible.
But the ones we remember are the good ones. Everyone seems to forget Shakespeare's not so popular works.

I agree with you in that he is not the be all and end all of writers. And this coming from somewhat of a self admitted Shakespeare Fanboy.

I guess my thought stems more from the fact that I have never heard any of these reviewers before. Maybe its because I avoid television, radio, and magazines like the plague so I don't have to deal with their asinine opinions.

 

[Layz92]

I guess my thought stems more from the fact that I have never heard any of these reviewers before. Maybe its because I avoid television, radio, and magazines like the plague so I don't have to deal with their asinine opinions.

Yeah they tend to be those pretentious "I am an art critic *puts in imaginary monocle*" types. Who I swear only try and be so deep and "critical" to impress guest presenters on the show. They are rare on TV but I hear them on the radio. I couldn't tell you about magazines I don't see why I should buy them when I can get the info for free.

Also it is more than just reviewers my english teachers always seem to be borderline fellating his memory for all their might.