Red Mosquito

E.H. Ruddock wrote:I just like how he dances in the video

tragabigzanda wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Also can we take a second to acknowledge how godawful the name “Childish Gambino” is

Yeah, there's no arguing this.

BurtReynolds wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Also can we take a second to acknowledge how godawful the name “Childish Gambino” is

Yeah, there's no arguing this.

Agreed

LoathedVermin72 wrote:The song is just like the video - lots of gimmicky flash with no real meat. It sells the illusion of meaning without actually saying anything.

tragabigzanda wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:It just seems like a lot of really basic juxtapositions and evocations that are not new or insightful at all. “Impressionistic” is a convenient way of saying “incoherent.” He just runs through the greatest hits of American black imagery in a way that is totally safe and comforting, trying to look superficially confrontational while ultimately pandering to easy liberal ideology. It’s meaningless. It’s tired. It accomplishes nothing except attracting attention from easily impressed liberals who lavish this kind of eye-rollingly overblown praise on some variation of this same thing seemingly every few months. We get a new “genius,” everyone looks woke, nothing moves, repeat.

Totally fair, all true. But just because it'd old hat to us doesn't mean it's not a gateway to someone else. Nuthin' But a G Thang blew my mind when I was 13, you know?

durdencommatyler wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:It just seems like a lot of really basic juxtapositions and evocations that are not new or insightful at all. “Impressionistic” is a convenient way of saying “incoherent.” He just runs through the greatest hits of American black imagery in a way that is totally safe and comforting, trying to look superficially confrontational while ultimately pandering to easy liberal ideology. It’s meaningless. It’s tired. It accomplishes nothing except attracting attention from easily impressed liberals who lavish this kind of eye-rollingly overblown praise on some variation of this same thing seemingly every few months. We get a new “genius,” everyone looks woke, nothing moves, repeat.

Totally fair, all true. But just because it'd old hat to us doesn't mean it's not a gateway to someone else. Nuthin' But a G Thang blew my mind when I was 13, you know?

Also, why does this have to change anything? Why can't art just be about expression? Your issue, LV, seems like it's far more able public reaction than the work itself.

durdencommatyler wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:It just seems like a lot of really basic juxtapositions and evocations that are not new or insightful at all. “Impressionistic” is a convenient way of saying “incoherent.” He just runs through the greatest hits of American black imagery in a way that is totally safe and comforting, trying to look superficially confrontational while ultimately pandering to easy liberal ideology. It’s meaningless. It’s tired. It accomplishes nothing except attracting attention from easily impressed liberals who lavish this kind of eye-rollingly overblown praise on some variation of this same thing seemingly every few months. We get a new “genius,” everyone looks woke, nothing moves, repeat.

Totally fair, all true. But just because it'd old hat to us doesn't mean it's not a gateway to someone else. Nuthin' But a G Thang blew my mind when I was 13, you know?

Also, why does this have to change anything? Why can't art just be about expression? Your issue, LV, seems like it's far more able public reaction than the work itself.