Somebody show this girl some Ferris Bueller for God’s sake!
Submitted by: Unknown
-
-
-
Copy & paste this:
« Previous Wait. It Doesn’t?! | Happy National UnFriend Day! Next »
« Previous Wait. It Doesn’t?! | Happy National UnFriend Day! Next »
Somebody show this girl some Ferris Bueller for God’s sake!
Submitted by: Unknown
hahahhahaha
Thats too much…lol
Lol. What she misses the pointillism.
you made me giggle
Cool story, bro.
if she had only spent ‘sunday in the park with george’ she would know better
Sondheim FTW!
love how the notes sound like the dots he’s painting. incredible!
brb killing myself
Hb..
….Oh wait!
My god.
I dunno art, but I know that’s a famous painting LoL
Samehere, every one 5 and up has seen this
not really, im 17 and this is the first time i saw it
i hadnt unerstood the joke till i read phil’s comment
now if he had used la gioconda, THAT would have been stupid
The fact that you didn’t manage to see a famous painting before you were 17 really doesn’t negate the fact that you should have.
I don’t know; I didn’t recognize it either. Where should I have seen this painting?
At school.
You must be a drop out or something.
What class? I haven’t had art class since elementary school. History, maybe? If it was mentioned, it was briefly and I’ve forgotten it.
I suppose I should point out that I am not a drop-out; in fact, I graduated with over 4.0 GPA.
It appeared at Looney Tunes Back in Action.
how do you graduate with a gpa over 4.0?
You’ll see this painting in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off
i’m almost 29 and i hadn’t seen it up until the beginning of this year, a musical started in my country, about the painting. I’d never think it was just a drawing though, when i’d first see it not knowing what it was.
I always appreciate a good art reference/joke/FAIL
I hope she meant to ask if he drew this thinking it was a REPRODUCTION of the famous one, if not…*facepalm*…
It’s not a drawing either way.
Anyone else relieved that she at least asked the question in a complete sentence?
Maybe there is hope.
Nope. No hope.
bwahaha! That’s a great title! (The word “échec” is “fail” in French.)
Except “échec” is masculine so it should be “the Island of le grand échec” (or even better “the Island du grand échec”)
Who cares?
Angel, apparently.
French “Grammar Nazi” care.
Are you Tony in disguise?
I knew someone was going to post it, just so they could feel entitled.
No one asked, btw.
I know french……. French Fries……!
“Yes. Yes I did.”
Meh. The only reason I’m even familiar with this painting is because it was in my geometry book in 11th grade. Just because Kathleen wasn’t familiar with it doesn’t make it a fail. Are we expected to be familiar with every single famous painting ever made, now?
No, of course not! Why don’t we just take such masterpieces from the museums where they are displayed and burn them? Better yet, let’s just forget about art alltogether! Why look at a painting when you can look at photos of the Jersey Shore cast doing whatever? Why read a good book when you can read gossip magazines? Why go to the theater when you can watch the huge amount of crapolla they broadcast on TV?
/sarcasm
Oh calm down. My point was just because she’s not familiar with ONE famous painting doesn’t make her a fail. Especially if she’s not interested in art. There are too many famous paintings to expect anyone to be familiar with them all.
first of all, people have the right to watch or look at whatever they wish. If you think jersey shore is sooooooo inferior to a Monet or a Van Gogh, don’t watch it. Your choice.
Second of all, some people don’t read either books or magazines, they could not have the ability, they could not have the access, they could not have the time, they could not have the money, see my point?
Why not forget about art? personally I like some art, but I don’t like other art. What is art? define it, isn’t a tv show art?
Most of the time someone’s art is aclaimed because someone talented and dedicated produced something that other people (and of course the artist) view worthy of attention and respect. A theater production invariably can have much of that, if it is good. But whose to say the tv show (which is usually much higher budgeted and more polished) and can’t be equally good?
Instead of making fun of someone for not knowing something, laugh inwardly at their ignorance and outwardly teach them to enjoy the pleasure that you’ve already been feasting upon.
Oh, yes, it takes years of practice to master the ability of filming a bunch of egocentered, useless carrots! gigi wasn’t criticising the whole TV industry, and neither am I, but calling Jersey Shore art should be punished with a good dose of ass-kicking.
I bet $100 that 80% of the ignorant morons that live in the USA have more than enough money to go to a art museum and APPRECIATE REAL ART! That is why s**t like Justin Bieber gets popular, because people like you insist on defending this type of thing and calling it art. I swear that by 2050 we will all be dead, or in the process of dying! God help us all.
You’re probably right a person with the internet, who has a facebook, definitely doesn’t have access to art. Nope definitely not, it couldn’t happen because there is absolutely no way that this picture is on the internet… oh wait…
This is by far the best comment I’ve ever read here
Word!
Agreed.
If I’d seen this before, I don’t remember it. I guess it didn’t make an impression. The art snobs can suck it.
Really? Ferris Bueller is the first thing that comes to your mind? Not “Sunday in the Park with George?” *sigh* That’s almost as bad as, “did you draw this?”
at least someone in the comments thought of Sondheim.
Thank God someone else recognized that this was a Seurat painting. “A Sunday on La Grande Jatte” How could anyone think of Ferris Bueller? The makers of Ferris Bueller would be embarrassed.
Save Ferris !
“Did you draw this?” Really? … I mean… I have no words for this.
Not to mention that the title that was posted for the painting is wrong.
Sad thing is….I recognized the painting…but didn’t “get” the reference to Ferris Bueller! HAHAHA
I still don’t get the Ferris Bueller reference to be honest. I know Sondheim…
Um… How do you not get the reference? The painting is in the movie when hey go to the museum. They spend a lot of time focusing on it.
idk not that big of a fail to me, i haven’t seen this painting since elementary school so I didn’t recognize it at first, i’m just not that interested in art
Watch the movie.
This painting appears in the film
i never noticed before but how come the lady closest to the…..”camera” have a monkey at her feets?
Seraut used a lot of symbolism. The monkey was a French symbol for a prostitute.
The empire state building appears in a lot of films, do you think of those films when you see it? Or do you think of the empire state building.
King Kong
WOW! Does anyone know how I can get this good with an etchasketch?
I only know it from Family Guy, where Stewie’s dying or something and wants to see it before he dies, and it does an extreme close-up on the girl’s face. I saw a lot of art in school, but never this piece.
YES! I came here to say that, haha. That’s the only place I’d seen it. I had art class for FIVE years and I never saw this. Apparently my teacher sucked?
This is why I weep for the future.
How the hell is this a fail? I didn’t even get it. This is a failed fail!
I’ve never seen this painting in my entire 24 years living..this is the first time. Does that make me ‘retarded’ or a ‘drop out’? You kids are amusing.
Yes, it does.
Seurat popularized the concept of pointillism. Why should you care? Because it’s all around you. See the various shades in your avatar? Those are created thanks to the way the eye blends different colours which are near each other.
The whole concept of pixels / ink droplets being able to ‘mix’ on the page is what allows full colour to be perceived out of an RGB pallette.
This work is hanging in the Art Institute of Chicago.
Um, no it doesn’t. I don’t like art, I have never been an art type of person. Not knowing this makes me ignorant when it comes to art, but so what?
I’m not saying I cannot appreciate it, but I seriously don’t have to know every single piece of artwork out there. I know about Van Gogh and his famous pieces, I have heard about Picasso and his famous pieces, but I honestly NEVER seen this one and no, it does not make me retarded or uneducated. I’m just not a fan of art, sue me!
I don’t live in Chicago and I couldn’t careless where this painting is hanging. I’m not an art fan, period. I’m not saying you have to be an art fan to know of this painting, but I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one that doesn’t know or ever heard about it.
I like pixels…doesn’t mean I’m retarded for not knowing ONE piece of art! OMG..
Missed the point entirely. This particular painting was THE first pixellated anything, ever. It PROVED the eye does not need a hard line, or even a line at all, to distinguish shapes. So it’s not just “a single piece of art”, it’s a piece of scientific research and a significant development in human history. Doesn’t mean you’re retarded but it does mean you’re ignorant. You should have come across this somewhere in school, and if you did not, the fail is on your teachers.
It does not matter whether it was the first or last. I did not miss the point AT ALL. The person agreed that “yes” I was either “retarded” or a “drop out” for not knowing about this painting. EVERYONE is ignorant when it comes to particular subjects, this just makes me ignorant in art, which I’m not too fond of (nothing wrong with this). I should come across this somewhere in school? Why? What is this helping me gain? Absolutely nothing. Whether this proved something or not, it doesn’t matter to me. I was able to survive and move on in life without it throughout all these years.
Well, I grew up in small town Florida, and now live in New York, and I know this piece. It is a seminal piece, and if you ever took any art class at all you should have learned about this piece before Picasso.
I also am not a big painting fan, but I am an art fan, I just prefer music. Not knowing art actually does make you ignorant of art, but that does not mean that you are dumb. There is a difference.
But either way, without a good working knowledge, at least, of art it does give you less of a well-rounded education.
I never took any art classes. Went to college for 4 years. I don’t necessarily think everyone in the world has to know about this piece. Not everyone knows everything in this world. This doesn’t make me neither retarded nor a drop out because I graduated from college years ago and never took any art classes.
Nope none of that can label you as a drop out, the fact that you used a double negative in a sentance might suggest that you could possibly be one.
“This doesn’t make me neither retarded nor a drop out…”
FAIL
And the fact that you spelled sentence wrong might suggest you could possibly be one as well.
“a double negative in a sentance”
FAIL.
And FYI, that’s NOT a double negative. A double negative would be: “I ain’t no fool.” You FOOL.
“”Neither” is a singular adjective and can be paired with “nor” in a sentence. “Neither” is never paired with “or”. When using “neither” in a sentence, you are saying not the first object and not the second object are behaving in a certain way. The nouns/pronouns are in agreement with one another. “Nor” can also be used independently when negating the second part of two negative clauses.”
Actually, neither means “not either”, so it IS negative, and your sentence DID contain a double negative. In your own explanation of neither/nor, you said, “When using ‘neither’ in a sentence, you are saying not the first object and not the second object are behaving in a certain way.” So “neither” and “nor” could theoretically be replaced with “not”, correct? How is that NOT a negative? You should have used “either…or” or “This makes me neither…nor”. Or maybe you meant to say “This doesn’t make me NOT retarded or NOT a dropout…”
By the way, when “neither” is paired with “nor”, it acts as a conjunction, not an adjective. I looked it up to make sure (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/neither). Using reference materials is a skill you should have picked up in your 16 or so years of schooling.
I noticed that, but didn’t want to correct myself. I am one to not use double negatives and I am a grammar nazi, you don’t need to correct me because I was aware of my mistake when I replied to the previous poster.
I wrote:
“This doesn’t make me neither retarded nor a drop out ”
Which should have been:
This doesn’t make me retarded nor a drop out” — satisfied?
No one’s perfect. I understand that. I am a grammar nazi, and I immediately saw at least a couple things wrong with your comment above, but I won’t mention them because that’s not how I roll, in general. It’s the internet. It’s informal. If you get your point across, why do people need to nitpick? And if I responded to every error I saw, it would never end, and I’d go insane! I only felt compelled to respond in this case because of the way you responded to the person who called you out on the double negative. You insisted you were right and called him/her a fool. I’d be satisfied if you apologized to You have to be joking, but you don’t need to worry about my satisfaction.
Did you see the way he responded to me, though? That’s why I snapped back..if he would have been nicer like you, then I wouldn’t reply the way I did.
That’s understandable. Why can’t we all just get along?
By the way, I’ve agreed all along with your original point, that you’re not necessarily an idiot or a dropout just because you’ve never seen one painting among millions of paintings in the history of the world. I’m considered by most to be an intelligent person, and while I had seen this painting before (probably first in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off), I did not know its significance. I’ve never had that much of an interest in the visual arts, so I didn’t choose to take any art classes in high school or college. Does this make my education less well-rounded than it could be? Probably. Does it make ignorant in that subject area? Most definitely. But does it make me stupid or uneducated? Absolutely not. Then again, I am a bit of a dropout — a college dropout. I attended for four years, but changed my major a lot and never quite completed my degree. I’m 34, and I still don’t really know what I want to do when I grow up! (Well, I do know, but I’m too afraid to pursue my dreams of a musical career. Haha!)
Have a happy Thanksgiving, if you celebrate it.
“This doesn’t make me NOT retarded or NOT a dropout…”
Wrong. This is what I meant to write: “This doesn’t make me retarded nor a drop out”
I didn’t need “neither”. I’m not sure what I was thinking at the time and when I replied to the other poster at first I completely missed where I used a double negative, then realized my mistake, but I just didn’t feel like correcting myself.
I know what you quoted here from my original reply was not what you meant to say. It was sarcasm.
“conj.
And not; or not; not either: has neither phoned nor written us; life forms that are neither plants nor animals.”
Example there. I know it acts as a conjunction, no one said it acted as an adjective when paired with nor. The paragraph I quoted clearly said that neither is a single adjective and can be paired with nor. The paragraph never stated that it wasn’t a conjunction when neither is paired with nor.
Oh, and in English (unlike, say, Spanish), adjectives are neither singular nor plural. For example, one dog can be loud, or several dogs can be loud. There is no difference in the adjective “loud” when using it with a singular noun vs. a plural noun.
Okay I’m finished. Thank you Amycakes for your insight. Obviously this is going nowhere. I hope you both, you too Bluetiful, had fantastic Thanksgivings!
Who’s the one that has got to be joking now? Lmao…SMH
Ha, that’s cool man, I never claimed to be the intelligent college graduate, you did. That is what makes the use of a double negative so humorous.
I never used a double negative and never claimed to be “intelligent”, just a college graduate who’s clueless about art. Doesn’t make me “retarded” nor a drop out. Get it now?
I’m sorry, but you trying to correct someone’s grammar makes it even more hilarious when you can’t spell nor know what a double negative is! LOL
Oh, and 24 years? Yeah, you’re still a kid. I’m over a decade older than you, and half the time I’M still considered a kid. Live with it, you don’t get to be an adult until you’re 40.
Honey, I’m a mother of 2 at 24. I have no time to be a “kid”. Lol.
How did you graduate from college, “years ago,” when you are 24 years old?
Do you not know what years ago means? Are you really this dense?
Just go look at some art.
Years ago insinuates many years, don’t you know what years ago means!?!?!?
No. Years ago does not insinuate “many years”. It simple means I graduated college – years. ago. Meaning, I didn’t graduate college last year or the year before that. Years. Ago.
Define “Ago”: gone by; or in the past; “two years ago”; “`agone’ is an archaic word for `ago’”
Define “Year”: The period of time during which Earth completes a single revolution around the sun, consisting of 365 days, 5 hours, 49 minutes, and 12 seconds of mean solar time. In the Gregorian calendar the year begins on January 1 and ends on December 31 and is divided into 12 months, 52 weeks, and 365 or 366 days.
Years (plural) ago. I’m not insinuating anything..maybe 3 years is many years for me, you take it as you like to =)!
I gotta go with the others here. “Years ago” is a colloquialism. Whatever the definitions of “year” and “ago” may be, when people in day-to-day conversation use the term “years ago”, they are implying that it is too many years to mention. I’d say it would have to be *at least* 5 years ago (and that’s being generous). But I guess when you’re in your mid-20s, 3 years seems like a lot. Honestly, when you said you graduated from college years ago, I took it to mean you were older than 24. I hear that term bandied about most often by people in their 40s and 50s or older. When I hear/read a twentysomething (or worse, a teenager) use it, it just sounds silly.
Incidentally, I once heard someone say that anything a person under 30 says is almost worthless. I was in my 20s at the time, and I took offense. Once I hit 30, I started to agree. (And being in my mid-30s now, I can say I heard that years ago.)
By the way, do you use words like kid and honey to demonstrate your superior maturity and authority? Maybe a little bit of insecurity?
Using the words kid and honey to demonstrate maturity and security? Why would I do that? I don’t need to demonstrate anything to strangers online. Notice how the person I was initially replying to called me a kid. All I said was that I didn’t have time to be a kid when I’m a mother of 2 at the age of 24. Where are you trying to get at here?
You’re proud of being a mother of 2 at the age of 24? No wonder you’ve never seen this painting; you were too busy failing to use contraceptives.
Why is there *always* at least one douchey commenter that won’t stop replying in a thread? Sigh. If you really have “no time to be a kid”, how is it that that you happen to have so much time on your hands to keep returning to this comment thread?
You’re proud of being a mother of 2 at the age of 24? No wonder you’ve never seen this painting; you were too busy failing to use contraceptives.
Why is there *always* at least one douchey commenter that won’t stop replying in a thread? Sigh. If you really have “no time to be a kid”, how is it that that you happen to have so much time on your hands to keep returning to this comment thread?
And my kids aren’t accidents. Your assumptions are both hilarious and entertaining, do continue please. I can reply all I want to, that’s what the comment section is for, right?
Having no time to be a kid and having time to reply to someone on a message board are completely different. Are you serious?
Thank you! I couldn’t agree more!
Yes, I am. Um, no..I actually had my kids AFTER college, try again, hun =). It doesn’t take a lot of time or energy to reply to a dumb commenter like you, *tee hee*. Done yet?
Lol! Artgeek city in here!
Honestly, objectively look at the picture, it looks like crap. If something actually looks good, the artgeeks won’t call it art. Anything they do call art looks like crap, it really does.
I think the world would be a better place without “art,” I really do.
It all depends on taste, Steve. I personally love this painting, and Seurat is one of my most favorite artists, so I would readily call this art.
I personally dislike abstract expressionism, so to me, Jackson Pollock would be the only type of painting that I would even come close to calling ‘crap’.
But I have a sister who adores abstract expressionism and as she tries to explain Pollock’s brilliance, I can see that she really thinks that it is gorgeous, so even though I don’t see it, I believe it is allowed to be art if it affects an impartial third-party in this way.
Don’t get me wrong, I make jokes all the time about how subjective art is, but I believe I should respect other people’s opinions, even if I don’t agree.
I think you should expose yourself to more art, just to see if you can find anything you like. You may be surprised.