Pretension: Is it now or is it just so 1997?

I don't really have much time for pretension. But the problem is, 90% of the time the word 'pretentious' is misapplied by complete morons. So I find myself sticking up for it.

I'm still laughing too hard about the Momus thing to even think about this question right now.

I dont know what it is really, is the problem. I mean the out-of- context namedropping of artistic stuff, say, isn't any less annoying if you've actually read or seen the stuff: it's the misapplication of the knowledge that grates.

Pretension is unproveable beccasue you can never prove if people are what they imagine they are. It all reminds me of aesop ...

The Lion and the Statue A MAN and a Lion were discussing the relative strength of men and lions in general. The Man contended that he and his fellows were stronger than lions by reason of their greater intelligence. “Come now with me,” he cried, “and I will soon prove that I am right.” So he took him into the public gardens and showed him a statue of Hercules overcoming the Lion and tearing his mouth in two. 1 “That is all very well,” said the Lion, “but proves nothing, for it was a man who made the statue.” “WE CAN EASILY REPRESENT THINGS AS WE WISH THEM TO BE.”

Definition of pretentiousness - quoting from Brian Eno's Diaries:

"I decided to turn the word 'pretentious' into a compliment. The common assumption is that there are 'real' people and there are others who are pretending to be something they're not. There is also an assumption that there's something morally wrong with pretending. My assumptions about culture as a place where you can take psychological risks without incurring physical penalties make me think that pretending is the most important thing we do. It's the way we make our thoughts experiments, find out what it would be like to be otherwise."

This seems sensible. I think the problem as I tried to hint above is that a lot of stuff in social discourse gets called 'pretentious' when really it's just someone being rude or insecure.

Pretension = feigned knowledge/artiness. slight vanity. ever watched the late review? or perhaps I am being a philistine?

I get the idea that the people on the late review do know what theyre talking about, though, even if their manner is somewhat precious.

Actually the question behind the question here is really interesting: what is the best way of talking about art? I mean I'm assuming Bill that you think art is worth talking about - so how should it be done?

Considering Magnus though that the name for the next Star Wars movie (Attack Of The Clones) was pretentious I fear I have lost all knowledge of what pretension is. Unlike Pre Menstrual Tension - which I am well aware of.

The gambit played by the pretentious is that just by name dropping they can effect both admiration (you've read that?) whilst at the same time getting across an idea. So describing - say - The Matrix as a pretty basic upshot of a week one philosophy course is not pretentious, whilst saying it is Descartian - and sucumbs to the same flaws - is. The first can be explained, the second needs reference to a subject which does not explicate itself.

Having pretensions though, excellent thing.

an interesting question tom (and one that i'm not sure I can answer!) erm, I'd like to see people talk about their individual response to art, rather than reference about a thousand other artists in the process. I suppose i look at art more from a 'does it look nice?' kind of angle rather than its supposed meaning. however, if meaning is put forward in a straightforward way, then that's fine and dandy. in which case, I think things should be straightforward, pretension is circling also then circling the issue at hand.

bill

I hate to say it but I think you were maybe fooled by Magnus' dry sarcasm. It's OK, though Pete, I know how much the Star Wars franchise means to you.

Me and my pristine, not touched by human hand 1977 wookie.

Has it been touched by some kind of alien hand, Pete? Does that make it more or less valuable?

Emma, next time Pete pisses you off, bend his wookie

Sometimes I feel I know nothing but pretentious people. I live in San Francisco, though.

That'll do it. Not as bad as the lower half of Manhattan though. I want to move to the Bronx, that's where it's happening now.

I am offended by the word pretentious: I prefer to be considered "differently comprehensible"...

You can also think of it as meaning "acting before tension".

My problem with "pretentious" (and "psuedo-intellectual" in the bargain) is precisely its misapplication, and it's continual use to imply that the target is something the speaker finds over- intellectualized or high-falutin' or incomprehensible. When in fact, the word can only be used by someone who completely understands the thing which is supposedly being pretended to, but just happens to think it's not that big of a deal.

Appropriate use of "pretentious": A big Warp fan is talking to a guy who says Kid A is the most innovative record ever and is sadly misunderstood by all who hear it. The big Warp fan says: "Boy is this guy pretentious."

Actual common use of "pretentious": An Aerosmith fan is talking to a guy who says Kid A is the most innovative record ever and is sadly misunderstood by all who hear it. The Aerosmith fan says . . .

But in the first qn why is the guy 'pretentious' and not ignorant. Now if the Kid A fan was pretending to be an electronica expert on the basis of Kid A, maybe....

Why is using names as shorthand for ideas necessarily a bad/snobbish thing? If a person is talking about a record that can best be described as sounding like Autechre, why bother explaining their sound at all? If the other person has heard of Autechre, they know exactly what is implied, and if not, I'm sure they wouldn't be interested in listening to someone explain it to them. The only thing worse than having to listen to people talk about the names of records you've never heard is having to listen to the same people describe their sound, unless they have a copy in their hand which they are about to play for you. I'm sure my ex-girlfriend can attest to that (although she would probably say that being forced to listen to the record in question trumps the other two situations hands down).

i am a pretentious pseudo-intellectual motherfucker

Tom: Well, in this scenario, the Kid A lover is pretending to some level of musical acuity which he just doesn't possess. Point taken, though: he wouldn't qualify as "pretentious" if the other guy said, "Hey, maybe you should check out these Warp releases," and he replied, "Yeah, I'd be quite interested to learn more about that."

This character is based on a person I encountered a few months ago who claimed Kid A was pretty much the most groundbreaking thing ever, and -- following my suggestion that maybe, just maybe, some of that stuff had been done before with -- made a face and claimed that "all of that stuff" was "boring" and "just making weird noises," whereas Kid A was somehow brilliant, and that furthermore, I was "just not getting the point" of Kid A because I wanted music to be "safe and easy" instead of "challenging." This was probably the most galling and painful conversation I've ever had to jog away from.