iwhyawli's Point CounterPoint on Pointillism

Is no fine art form safe from GWOP's hatchet?

First, we all much enjoyed GWOP's total misinterpretations of the Truman Show. Then ChurchMouse pops up to misconstrue Louisa May Alcott's viewpoint in "Little Women". And now, most recently, we have Sharla and 'Annie Louise' (wink wink) relying upon neoimpressionist technique as further evidence that Kate Gosselin is the world's crappiest mom.

I stumbled on this week's GWOP's main page post by 'Annie Louise' (wink wink) when I was over there copying Sharla's Mother's Day picture. Apparently, only people who took an art history class would know what pointillism is. :: a million eye rolls ::

---------------------------------------------

Kate's Behavior as Art by Annie Louise

Once again, this falls into the “why was I using any brain cells even thinking of this?” category. But something occurred to me about how people here are so criticized by the sheeple for the way we point out seemingly small things about Kate. They think we pick on her for things that don’t matter. But it’s actually a lot like pointillism (welcome back to art history class, folks.)


You know it – the style of art (Georges Seurat, etc.) in which the artist uses small dots of paint. Viewed up close, it looks like random little blobs. You step back a bit, and a whole, very cohesive picture appears. (pixels on an LCD TV work the same way to form an image.)So while we may talk about little “dots” a good deal of the time – hair extensions, a scowly photo, a cackly laugh, a sick tup on the laundry room floor, “come and get your popcorn,” a book tour away from the kids – we’re all keenly aware of the big picture those things form. Taken by themselves, I don’t think anyone would think twice about one of the “dots.” But each one fits into the big picture, and it’s a damn ugly and disturbing one.She just keeps supplying us with dot after dot to add to the picture, doesn’t she?


Thank you Annie Louise

Posted by Sharla on 05/06/2010

-----------------------------------------------------


Dear Annie Louise (wink, wink):

You ignorant slut. I know you weren't talking to me in your ... um, very provocative essay because ... um, I am not a sheeple. I wouldn't have the foggiest clue what Kate Gosselin or her kids were doing if it weren't for your ilk following her around like lost puppies. But allow me anyway, if you will, to point counterpoint your completely stupid post.


First a correction: Y'all don't 'seemingly' point out small things about Kate. There's no question about it. You DO point out small things about Kate. You all do it every day, all day.


And yes, we gwopwoppers totally get that you do it to "paint" a picture of Kate -- a very unflattering one. We also get that you're 100% physically and psychologically incapable of painting your picture using any sort of positive strokes and bright colors.


I won't speak for other gwopwoppers, but what strikes *ME* as so completely oddball about you and your [holds nose]kind[hold nose] is that you're bothering to paint a picture at all--- even if it were by some miracle a totally positive picture.

I'm not sure I can't state this any more clearly than I've already tried to state a hundred mission times, but normal people do not sit around and scrutinize, analzye and judge every last detail of another person's life. Normal people worry only about their own lives, their own happiness and their own love offerings.

In the spectrum of life, people can be classified by three personality types: fans, normal people and psychos. I don't "get" fandom myself. Sure, there are lots of people, restaurants, books, songs, ideas, etc. that I admire but aside from the occassional rant on this here gwopwop blog -- the only way any celebrity will ever know how I feel about them is if THEY walk up to ME on the street and ask me. Fans, for whatever reason feel its necessary to go the extra mile and show their appreciation. All in all, fandom is apparently fun for the fans, seems completely harmless and is perhaps flattering, rewarding or motivating to the celebrity. Normal people, like me, just quietly buy their stuff, or not, and move on with life. Psychos try to inflict personal harm and injury on the object of their affection.


I guess what I'm trying to say is: YOU GWOPPERS ARE PSYCHOTIC!

Seurat's magnificent paintings represent his scientific experiments with color. He wasn't using dots to communicate the solution for world harmony in secret code. If he knew that highly paid professional sots like 'Anna Louise; (wink, wink) would one day misrepresent the significance of his work and color discoveries as a vehicle for crucifying someone, he probably would have taken a blow torch to A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grand Jatte and never painted again.

If Anna Louise (wink, wink) actually did take an art history course, I'm betting she flunked it.