Information
Justin Bieber has a minion!
Minion the Legacy
Minion the Legacy
Justin Bieber
Legacy Name: Justin Bieber
The
Chibi RuffieOwner:
shakesAge: 8 years, 2 months, 3 weeks
Born: February 11th, 2016
Adopted: 8 years, 2 months, 3 weeks ago
Adopted: February 11th, 2016
Statistics
- Level: 12
- Strength: 28
- Defense: 10
- Speed: 10
- Health: 11
- HP: 10/11
- Intelligence: 1
- Books Read: 1
- Food Eaten: 0
- Job: Unemployed
h2 {display:none;}[style]#pet_friends{display:none}[/style][style]#pet_minion{display:none}/*Moves Treasure*/#pet_treasure{position:absolute; top:10px;left:720px;}* {margin: 0; padding: 0;}#header, #postcards, #sidebar, #menu, #rightbg, #bookmarks, #footer {display: none;}body, #page, #content {background: #c4cee9;}.prototip {display: none;}/*Moves pet image, name, owner, color and spotlight*/#column_2 {position:absolute; top:0px; left:0px;}/*moves pet stats*/#column_3 {position:absolute; top:90px; left:510px;}.statbar{display:none;}/*Moves main description*/#pet_desc{position:absolute; left: 270px; top:450px;height:200px; overflow:auto;border-style: dotted; border-color: white;}html {margin: auto !important;width: 100%;height: 100%;background-color: #c4cee9;}/* Start http://www.cursors-4u.com */ body, a:hover {cursor: url(http://cur.cursors-4u.net/others/oth-4/oth374.cur), progress !important;} /* End http://www.cursors-4u.com */[/style][big][center]is it too late now to say sorry?[/big][/center]
Justin Bieber was discovered in 2007 when Scooter Braun, his future manager, stumbled upon a YouTube video of the then-boy singer covering the Ne-Yo song “So Sick.” Bieber had amassed a virtual following that would only grow—before his first official single was released in 2009, he was already the number 23 most subscribed musician on YouTube. Braun introduced Bieber to Usher, who inducted him into the music industry. Under the guise of being Usher’s protégé, Bieber was brought introduced to the music industry with high expectations. His first album, My World, was released in 2009 and sold 137,000 copies in its first week. The follow up album My World 2.0 debuted at number 1 on the U.S. Billboard Top 200 and sold more copies the following week, making him the first artist since the Beatles to do so. Bieber’s first albums were unapologetically pop, and he was quickly condemned to the land of ‘teenybop’—he created music ‘for’ preteen girls, and at best could become a guilty pleasure for listeners over 15. Bieber’s first two singles, “One Time” and “One Less Lonely Girl,” were regarded as the most bubblegum of pop, a status that quickly established him among his peers as ‘uncool’.
Bieber initially seemed completely unfazed by this and was known for being quite chivalrous to his fans. He dubbed his followers ‘Beliebers’ and has continuously been vocal about how grateful he is for their continued patronage. In his autobiography, Bieber writes:
[i]“I wouldn’t be anywhere if it weren’t for you—my fans. You are the reason I get to do what I love. Without your love and support I couldn’t keep creating my music and sharing it with everyone all over the world. Everywhere I go, whatever I do, I try to connect with as many of you as possible—and that means everything to me.” [/i]
It is with this (gr)attitude that Bieber actively rewards fans for their devotion. The singer regularly replies to tweets from Beliebers and patiently takes pictures with those who meet him on the street or at events. It was the internet that gave birth to Bieber’s fame, and the internet that has adamantly attempted to tear the singer down ever since. By 2009 the only thing hotter than Bieber was hating him. Online Bieber hate communities have continuously grown and thrived. Bieber’s harshest critics band together online through various forums and often attempt to make waves among the Beliebers. There are dozens of Facebook groups “dedicated to spreading and promoting hatred of the teenager…as well as raising questions over his sexuality.” The top definition of Justin Bieber on Urban Dictionary from 2009 is:
[i]“A 15 year old who looks like and sounds like a 10 year old. (hasn’t hit puberty yet) who had made one song called “One Time” where he throws a party at Usher’s house with no alcohol or weed, just a clean party. The Song sounds like a little kid screaming at you on Xbox Live. The truth is all the girls care about his looks (blonde hair brown eyed skater faggot). He is the worst thing to come to music since the Jonas Brothers, Hannah Montana, and Naked Brothers Band”[/i]
This awkward criticism reveals that “when they have to be justified, tastes are asserted purely negatively,” the hate itself seems to become sufficient for explaining Bieber’s flaws. Bieber has often failed to conform to the gender binary, and this tendency probably contributed to the widespread hatred of him. The singer was harassed online for his perceived androgyny, which reinforced when in 2010 a lesbian in Maryland was mistaken for him in a bar. Many started getting sick of the hubbub surrounding Bieber. Some web developers even created a widget called “Shaved Bieber” that could be installed on Firefox or Chrome to block all mentions and pictures of the singer.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
A week before his 17th birthday, Bieber appeased any qualms of androgyny with a ‘million dollar haircut.’ He shed his boyish ‘flippy hair’ for a more mature look, a growth which was reflected in his next studio album, Believe. Rolling Stone gave the album a 3/5 star rating and found that Bieber’s “voice has deepened…the beats are more driving and libidinous, the sonic settings more intense and wide-ranging.” The lead single from the album, “Boyfriend”, debuted at #2 on the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 Chart and had the second-highest-ever debut sales of a digital single. That song was Bieber’s first true radio hit and precluded a series of other successful singles, “As Long As You Love Me” and “Beauty and a Beat.” With these hits, Bieber was successfully transformed from novelty ‘kid’ star to real pop presence. This metamorphosis was accompanied by an increase of fans and foes. Bieber continued to be a figurehead of the limelight.
On New Year’s Day, 2013, a paparazzo was killed while attempting to get a photograph of Bieber, an incident which would begin a string of negative press that’s continued to the present. Bieber’s car had been pulled over for speeding on the freeway and the paparazzo, Chris Guerra, attempted to take pictures of the police encounter and was told by the officer to go back to his own car. When attempting to cross the street, Guerra was struck and killed by another motorist. Only five days later, photos of Bieber smoking weed were leaked by TMZ. On the website 4Chan, a group of anonymous users created the hoax #Cut4Bieber, for which they posted pictures of self-harm to Twitter with the hashtag. They hoped to inspire Beliebers to cut themselves in order to ‘send Bieber a message’ that smoking weed was not acceptable. A year later, in January 2014, Bieber was arrested while drag racing for driving under the influence, resisting arrest, and driving with an expired license. The following day, a petition to get Bieber deported began circulating online via the White House’s “We the People” website. The petition reached the required 100,000 signatures required for an official White House response, which officially declined to deport the singer. Bieber’s shenanigans quickly morphed his image from annoying boy singer to morally corrupted star. As soon as questioning his character became justified by the general public, morality became the most crucial ‘justification’ of dismissing Bieber’s music. The (somewhat) absolute moralism of the media and the ever-more-politically-correct masses maintained that because Bieber had revealed himself to be a ‘bad person,’ his music was inconsumable. Absolute moralism maintains that art must, in order to be good art, be created by a person of sound character and must contain virtue within the work of art itself, “art is good as it is expressive of, and conducive to, virtuous character and right conduct, by precept, by example, or by a general ennobling influence effected by the quality of sheer beauty of form.” This theory further ascertains that “a work of art, while being aesthetically excellent, may be morally objectionable, and…[this] may render it doubly unacceptable.” Absolute moralism has been the mainstream art philosophy for much of Western history. Even Plato promises that “good rhythm wait[s] upon a good disposition…the truly good and fair disposition of the character and the mind.” Therefore, good music can only be created by good people. Absolute moralists believe it is “inadequate to merely entertain,” that art must have agreeable content and intention to be worthy of praise.
This philosophy takes on a slightly different meaning in the modern context. In this day and age the personal has again become political. Though listening to ‘shallow fluff’ music still ‘says something’ about a person’s mentality, consuming goods made by morally objectionable people is seen as supporting ‘bad’ qualities and policies. What are the implications of supporting a morally objectionable artist? Is supporting an ‘objectionable’ artist actually indicative that the listener agrees with the politics and opinions of the artist? I would say not. The connection between values and music is entirely constructed, and seems silly when compared with other potentially ‘immoral’ ventures:
[i]"To say that poetry is moral or immoral is as meaningless as to say that an equilateral triangle is moral and an isosceles triangle immoral. Surely we must realize the absurdity of testing anything by a standard which does not belong to it or a purpose for which it was not intended. Imagine these whiffs of conversation at a dinner table: “this cauliflower would be excellent if it had only been prepared in accordance with international law.” “Do you know why my cook’s pastry is so good? He has never told a lie or seduced a woman.” [/i]Of course it seems ridiculous to question the moral compass of a chef and equate that with their cooking, and since many believe cooking is an art form, why stop with cooking? Who is to say that any sort of art is morally objectionable at all?
Morality aside, those who took the time to listen to Bieber’s new music found a welcome surprise. Bieber’s 2013 album Journals was met with critical acclaim and the singer was applauded for a more mature sound. Beliebers begged Bieber’s foes to listen to his music before criticizing him for his character. These pleas reflect an absolute aesthetic approach to music appreciation. Aestheticism is a near-opposite of absolute moralism; essentially, the philosophy contends that art “must be conceived in terms of the aesthetic surface, qualitatively or structurally…art is a matter of sensuous quality and design, not of meaning.” The exact ‘meaning’ of art is completely subjective. The audience and the artist interpret pieces personally, and so art must be appreciated aesthetically and evaluated in that way. Absolute aestheticism as an art philosophy was popularized in Victorian England by figures like Walter Pater, James Whistler, and Oscar Wilde. These men rallied around “the ambiguous but stirring slogan, borrowed and translated from earlier French writers, ‘art for art’s sake.’” This philosophy is not as popular in the present day, which is why Bieber ‘haters’ refuse to ‘just listen’ to the man’s music like the Beliebers insist.
Through all the controversy, Beliebers have continued to feel a deep connection with Bieber and have defended him in his darkest hours. In 2013, on a segment of Jimmy Kimmel Live’s Lie Witness News, Beliebers waiting in line at a concert were asked about made-up injustices by Bieber. These included that he hit his grandmother so hard she had to go to the hospital, didn’t know how to read, peed on the American flag, and had car tires made from the bodies of baby seals. It is this blind devotion to Bieber that garners his fans so much stigma. The most popular comment on the Kimmel YouTube video, made by Heather Laney, reads:
[i]Wtf [what the fuck] is wrong with them [the Beliebers]?!?! He’s a freaking cocaine addict, who’s been thrown in jail, he doesn’t even deserve to be famous. I don’t get why people obsess over an immature crack addict who acts like he’s the freaking king of the world. What really angers me is that they compare that thing (Justin) to GOD. God!!! -_-[/i]
That comment, which received 236 ‘upvotes,’ is a perfect example of present-day Bieber and Belieber criticism. Supporters of the singer are questioned, Bieber is accused of being a cocaine addict (which is false, he has never tested positive for cocaine), a fact about his legal history is stated, and his fame is delegitimized. Another comment on the video, made by Lance Evans, read “I’m not worried for these girls. They can’t be changed. Let them burn in hell for their lack of moral values.” Beliebers turn a blind eye to the singer’s bad behavior, while his music falls unceremoniously on the deaf ears of those who oppose him.
text byshakes, image by Interview Magazine, cursor by Cursors 4 U
Justin Bieber was discovered in 2007 when Scooter Braun, his future manager, stumbled upon a YouTube video of the then-boy singer covering the Ne-Yo song “So Sick.” Bieber had amassed a virtual following that would only grow—before his first official single was released in 2009, he was already the number 23 most subscribed musician on YouTube. Braun introduced Bieber to Usher, who inducted him into the music industry. Under the guise of being Usher’s protégé, Bieber was brought introduced to the music industry with high expectations. His first album, My World, was released in 2009 and sold 137,000 copies in its first week. The follow up album My World 2.0 debuted at number 1 on the U.S. Billboard Top 200 and sold more copies the following week, making him the first artist since the Beatles to do so. Bieber’s first albums were unapologetically pop, and he was quickly condemned to the land of ‘teenybop’—he created music ‘for’ preteen girls, and at best could become a guilty pleasure for listeners over 15. Bieber’s first two singles, “One Time” and “One Less Lonely Girl,” were regarded as the most bubblegum of pop, a status that quickly established him among his peers as ‘uncool’.
Bieber initially seemed completely unfazed by this and was known for being quite chivalrous to his fans. He dubbed his followers ‘Beliebers’ and has continuously been vocal about how grateful he is for their continued patronage. In his autobiography, Bieber writes:
[i]“I wouldn’t be anywhere if it weren’t for you—my fans. You are the reason I get to do what I love. Without your love and support I couldn’t keep creating my music and sharing it with everyone all over the world. Everywhere I go, whatever I do, I try to connect with as many of you as possible—and that means everything to me.” [/i]
It is with this (gr)attitude that Bieber actively rewards fans for their devotion. The singer regularly replies to tweets from Beliebers and patiently takes pictures with those who meet him on the street or at events. It was the internet that gave birth to Bieber’s fame, and the internet that has adamantly attempted to tear the singer down ever since. By 2009 the only thing hotter than Bieber was hating him. Online Bieber hate communities have continuously grown and thrived. Bieber’s harshest critics band together online through various forums and often attempt to make waves among the Beliebers. There are dozens of Facebook groups “dedicated to spreading and promoting hatred of the teenager…as well as raising questions over his sexuality.” The top definition of Justin Bieber on Urban Dictionary from 2009 is:
[i]“A 15 year old who looks like and sounds like a 10 year old. (hasn’t hit puberty yet) who had made one song called “One Time” where he throws a party at Usher’s house with no alcohol or weed, just a clean party. The Song sounds like a little kid screaming at you on Xbox Live. The truth is all the girls care about his looks (blonde hair brown eyed skater faggot). He is the worst thing to come to music since the Jonas Brothers, Hannah Montana, and Naked Brothers Band”[/i]
This awkward criticism reveals that “when they have to be justified, tastes are asserted purely negatively,” the hate itself seems to become sufficient for explaining Bieber’s flaws. Bieber has often failed to conform to the gender binary, and this tendency probably contributed to the widespread hatred of him. The singer was harassed online for his perceived androgyny, which reinforced when in 2010 a lesbian in Maryland was mistaken for him in a bar. Many started getting sick of the hubbub surrounding Bieber. Some web developers even created a widget called “Shaved Bieber” that could be installed on Firefox or Chrome to block all mentions and pictures of the singer.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
A week before his 17th birthday, Bieber appeased any qualms of androgyny with a ‘million dollar haircut.’ He shed his boyish ‘flippy hair’ for a more mature look, a growth which was reflected in his next studio album, Believe. Rolling Stone gave the album a 3/5 star rating and found that Bieber’s “voice has deepened…the beats are more driving and libidinous, the sonic settings more intense and wide-ranging.” The lead single from the album, “Boyfriend”, debuted at #2 on the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 Chart and had the second-highest-ever debut sales of a digital single. That song was Bieber’s first true radio hit and precluded a series of other successful singles, “As Long As You Love Me” and “Beauty and a Beat.” With these hits, Bieber was successfully transformed from novelty ‘kid’ star to real pop presence. This metamorphosis was accompanied by an increase of fans and foes. Bieber continued to be a figurehead of the limelight.
On New Year’s Day, 2013, a paparazzo was killed while attempting to get a photograph of Bieber, an incident which would begin a string of negative press that’s continued to the present. Bieber’s car had been pulled over for speeding on the freeway and the paparazzo, Chris Guerra, attempted to take pictures of the police encounter and was told by the officer to go back to his own car. When attempting to cross the street, Guerra was struck and killed by another motorist. Only five days later, photos of Bieber smoking weed were leaked by TMZ. On the website 4Chan, a group of anonymous users created the hoax #Cut4Bieber, for which they posted pictures of self-harm to Twitter with the hashtag. They hoped to inspire Beliebers to cut themselves in order to ‘send Bieber a message’ that smoking weed was not acceptable. A year later, in January 2014, Bieber was arrested while drag racing for driving under the influence, resisting arrest, and driving with an expired license. The following day, a petition to get Bieber deported began circulating online via the White House’s “We the People” website. The petition reached the required 100,000 signatures required for an official White House response, which officially declined to deport the singer. Bieber’s shenanigans quickly morphed his image from annoying boy singer to morally corrupted star. As soon as questioning his character became justified by the general public, morality became the most crucial ‘justification’ of dismissing Bieber’s music. The (somewhat) absolute moralism of the media and the ever-more-politically-correct masses maintained that because Bieber had revealed himself to be a ‘bad person,’ his music was inconsumable. Absolute moralism maintains that art must, in order to be good art, be created by a person of sound character and must contain virtue within the work of art itself, “art is good as it is expressive of, and conducive to, virtuous character and right conduct, by precept, by example, or by a general ennobling influence effected by the quality of sheer beauty of form.” This theory further ascertains that “a work of art, while being aesthetically excellent, may be morally objectionable, and…[this] may render it doubly unacceptable.” Absolute moralism has been the mainstream art philosophy for much of Western history. Even Plato promises that “good rhythm wait[s] upon a good disposition…the truly good and fair disposition of the character and the mind.” Therefore, good music can only be created by good people. Absolute moralists believe it is “inadequate to merely entertain,” that art must have agreeable content and intention to be worthy of praise.
This philosophy takes on a slightly different meaning in the modern context. In this day and age the personal has again become political. Though listening to ‘shallow fluff’ music still ‘says something’ about a person’s mentality, consuming goods made by morally objectionable people is seen as supporting ‘bad’ qualities and policies. What are the implications of supporting a morally objectionable artist? Is supporting an ‘objectionable’ artist actually indicative that the listener agrees with the politics and opinions of the artist? I would say not. The connection between values and music is entirely constructed, and seems silly when compared with other potentially ‘immoral’ ventures:
[i]"To say that poetry is moral or immoral is as meaningless as to say that an equilateral triangle is moral and an isosceles triangle immoral. Surely we must realize the absurdity of testing anything by a standard which does not belong to it or a purpose for which it was not intended. Imagine these whiffs of conversation at a dinner table: “this cauliflower would be excellent if it had only been prepared in accordance with international law.” “Do you know why my cook’s pastry is so good? He has never told a lie or seduced a woman.” [/i]Of course it seems ridiculous to question the moral compass of a chef and equate that with their cooking, and since many believe cooking is an art form, why stop with cooking? Who is to say that any sort of art is morally objectionable at all?
Morality aside, those who took the time to listen to Bieber’s new music found a welcome surprise. Bieber’s 2013 album Journals was met with critical acclaim and the singer was applauded for a more mature sound. Beliebers begged Bieber’s foes to listen to his music before criticizing him for his character. These pleas reflect an absolute aesthetic approach to music appreciation. Aestheticism is a near-opposite of absolute moralism; essentially, the philosophy contends that art “must be conceived in terms of the aesthetic surface, qualitatively or structurally…art is a matter of sensuous quality and design, not of meaning.” The exact ‘meaning’ of art is completely subjective. The audience and the artist interpret pieces personally, and so art must be appreciated aesthetically and evaluated in that way. Absolute aestheticism as an art philosophy was popularized in Victorian England by figures like Walter Pater, James Whistler, and Oscar Wilde. These men rallied around “the ambiguous but stirring slogan, borrowed and translated from earlier French writers, ‘art for art’s sake.’” This philosophy is not as popular in the present day, which is why Bieber ‘haters’ refuse to ‘just listen’ to the man’s music like the Beliebers insist.
Through all the controversy, Beliebers have continued to feel a deep connection with Bieber and have defended him in his darkest hours. In 2013, on a segment of Jimmy Kimmel Live’s Lie Witness News, Beliebers waiting in line at a concert were asked about made-up injustices by Bieber. These included that he hit his grandmother so hard she had to go to the hospital, didn’t know how to read, peed on the American flag, and had car tires made from the bodies of baby seals. It is this blind devotion to Bieber that garners his fans so much stigma. The most popular comment on the Kimmel YouTube video, made by Heather Laney, reads:
[i]Wtf [what the fuck] is wrong with them [the Beliebers]?!?! He’s a freaking cocaine addict, who’s been thrown in jail, he doesn’t even deserve to be famous. I don’t get why people obsess over an immature crack addict who acts like he’s the freaking king of the world. What really angers me is that they compare that thing (Justin) to GOD. God!!! -_-[/i]
That comment, which received 236 ‘upvotes,’ is a perfect example of present-day Bieber and Belieber criticism. Supporters of the singer are questioned, Bieber is accused of being a cocaine addict (which is false, he has never tested positive for cocaine), a fact about his legal history is stated, and his fame is delegitimized. Another comment on the video, made by Lance Evans, read “I’m not worried for these girls. They can’t be changed. Let them burn in hell for their lack of moral values.” Beliebers turn a blind eye to the singer’s bad behavior, while his music falls unceremoniously on the deaf ears of those who oppose him.
text by
shakes, image by Interview Magazine, cursor by Cursors 4 U
Pet Treasure
Giselle Never Say Neverland Lock Of Hair
White Tangerine Ear Buds