>zoomers aren't dumb or retar-
youtube.com
Zoomers aren't dumb or retar-
Other urls found in this thread:
I ain't watching that shit but Spiderland is a boring ass album, Talk Talk is superior.
>this very popular and well regarded album is good
thanks for the informative review
for me it's shipping news
ain'tcha' too young to be self-advertising on Any Forums, sonny?
this was made 3 years ago
damn you were really procrastinating, huh?
It says one year ago bruv
children reviewing albums that they cannot understand the political/experiential/emotional components of is very interesting. I'm not trying to say that their opinions matter less on art that addresses these topics, but that they can give fresh and unusual perspectives compared to most (even if underdeveloped).
like with picrel, how could a 13 year old possibly understand the narrative in Don, Aman? Their brains are just starting to develop and pay attention to peer influence, they're starting to need time for decompression, and their self-image relies greatly on those around them still. Don, Aman addresses these things from the perspective of a more developed brain. It doesn't mean that a preadolescent/early adolescent child couldn't relate to the ideas in the song, but their perspective of these things are objectively different from most people (around 15 years+). Usually positionality isn't that big of a deal, since perspective varies so much across people, but these are developmental differences that are nearly universal.
pic not rel
meant to relate the 2nd paragraph to op's pic*
how do you go from this...
holy shit you are a fucking pussy
it's okay to criticize things and think they are bad. you don't need these faggoty little disclaimers assuring us you aren't saying anything unwholesome
because people who start youtube channels have no personality of their own and merely absorb whatever gives them internet points
People under 25 shouldn't be allowed to post on the internet
to this...
I think you missed the point of my post, so in other words, the "disclaimer" is intended for people just like you
his post is worded really weirdly i think youre replying to a bot ->
Who is she?
so I said you're a pussy faggot who's trying overly hard to give the impression of being critical
and your response, which you seem to think is a refutation, is that you included a disclaimer because you are a pussy and you were worried about how you would be perceived
Often you just end up just getting a performance of a review. A 13-year-old can interject their own criticisms, but those criticisms are likely to be surface level ("good" "bad" "interesting"). They're foremost aping the conventions of reviews. Not very valuable for audiences but valuable for the child, as they're developing english and communication skills
It's called overdosing on irony. It happens when you're terminally online
>she
unreal...
pffftahahahahahah
looks like a woman to me so she’s a girl unless stated otherwise
this is my last response to you because you're really missing the point and its not worth the effort. I put the "disclaimer"
>I'm not trying to say that their opinions matter less on art that addresses these topics, but that they can give fresh and unusual perspectives compared to most (even if underdeveloped).
to avoid the exact argument you're making. I'm not being critical at all, in fact I'm trying to do the opposite. I'm really trying to say that they can give unique perspectives on this stuff that others can't give due to biological developments. and no, I don't really care about how im perceived on an anonymous image board, sorry user.
this is a good point. This practice sets them up to do deeper analysis later too. If they were to give higher level criticism or analysis, which I'm sure happens sometimes, it would be interesting to see how these perspectives differ from more developed people. i'm not gonna watch any of this kid's vids to find that out though