Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

monart

Regulars
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About monart

  • Rank
    Novice

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Real Name
    Monart Pon
  1. There is a recent work that was explicitly based on and inspired by Rand's description of "the Concerto of Deliverance". It was commissioned to commemorate the Rand Centenary. Lots of excerpts and info is at http://www.starshipaurora.com/concertoofdeliverance.html Later, search here at OO for the thread last year that discussed the production of this album. - Monart
  2. Check out the album, Concerto of Deliverance, that was commissioned for the Rand Centenary and inspired by a quotation from Rand in Atlas Shrugged. Lots of excerpts and info at http://www.starshipaurora.com/concertoofdeliverance.html Last year there was an extended discussion here on this site about the album (or, rather, around the album). To find the thread, ust key in <Concerto of Deliverance> on this site's search box. But first listen to the samples with your own ears. - Monart
  3. Exactly! On a forum where the content is screened before it gets posted, you and the pathetic garbage that you spew would never be seen. But here you get to post your "neo-objectivist" crap and demonstrate your disdain for the philosophy of Objectivism and its creator. To "reason" with the likes of you would be obscene. The only choice is to ignore a cuckoo bird like you, or ridicule you. Up to now it has been entertaining doing the latter. Where, in this thread, did Stepen Speicher ever "reason"?. All his posts were attempts at *diversion* from reasoning -- using ineffective and unfunny insults, slurrs, intimidation, etc., that do no credit to his already disrespectable reputation. Not once yet has he answered the rebuttals in my post "The 'Immorality' of a Concerto of Deliverance", or in my other post. His just asserting that he doesn't care to, isn't a reasonable answer. He's better off being silent. -Monart
  4. A review of the album, "Concerto of Deliverance", is just published at Atlasphere. See announcement below. Other earlier reviews are at http://www.starshipaurora.com/cd_comment_01.html http://www.starshipaurora.com/cd_comment_02.html http://www.starshipaurora.com/cd_comment_03.html ---- August 12, 2004 A new feature column has just been published at the Atlasphere: John Mills-Cockell’s Concerto of Deliverance (Review) by Douglas Wagoner Far from a traditional concerto, John Mills-Cockell's Concerto of Deliverance (commissioned by Monart Pon) is perhaps best viewed as an idiosyncratic concept album inspired by Rand's work. Go here to read the full article: http://www.theatlasphere.com/columns/04081...deliverance.php ___________________________________________________ The Atlasphere http://www.TheAtlasphere.com Connecting Admirers of The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged
  5. In Stephen Speicher's latest post, observe that he continues to show rancor and use ridicule to divert attention away from the fact that he hasn't demonstrated any reasoning for his charge that I'm "immorally violating Rand's intellectual property rights". Nor has he supported his charge that I'm a "liar" and a "fraud". Stephen Speicher should be told that independent minds can read for themselves and don't need Speicher's telling of the alleged connection between "Starship Aurora" and the "Minerva Constitution". It is *not* the constitution of Starship Aurora, which is only a philosophy and art organization. SA was never involved in the Minerva project or any political project. A copy of that constitution is posted on the website for historical reasons, and as an example of how a modern, limited government constitution may or may not be written. What is the point of Stephen Speicher's mis-representation about this? The pattern of his posts indicate that it's another distraction and a continuing attempt to defame my character, presuming falsely to know who I really am. In all other moderated forums, such repeated insults substituting for reasons, like those being posted by Stephen Speicher, would have been clear grounds for deletion and unsubscription long before this. But observe that this forum is different, it seems some are exempt from the posting policy. Meanwhile, Stephen Speicher should know that his posts are making his reputation even worse. -Monart
  6. Observe that Betsy Speicher, too, didn't seem to have read my post, analyzing and refuting hers and others' claim; otherwise, she would not keep restating the claim without giving the grounds for it. Observe that Betsy Speicher's conditions of proof for showing I'm not "exploiting" Rand assumes that which she and the others still need to prove. Observe that these people are regarding their claim as if it were an axiom, a self-evident, unquestionable axiom, requiring no proof, and any attempt to disprove it, "proves" that the disprover is "dishonest and immoral". But their claim is obviously not an axiom, but they do regard it as an unqestionable stand that must be upheld regardless of proof or reason. -Monart
  7. To be temporally precise: Stephen Speicher did not call me -- "irrational", a "liar", an "intellectual and ethical fraud", etc.,-- not immediately after my introductory post. He did that after I answered, in my next post, Betsy Speicher's questions about "objectivist astronautics" and "neo objectivists". His condemnation was, nonetheless, an expression of his opinion about my involvement with Concerto of Deliverance (and my other works), the album of which was the context in which I quote him in my post today. Observe that Stephen Speicher still has given no real arguments to support his condemnation of me or to invalidate my extended analysis of his and other detractors' claim. Observe also that he, like Don Watkins III, is only trying to dismiss my arguments with ineffective intimidation. Observe, finally, that the thumbnail graphic by Stephen Speicher's name, of an astronomical scene -- when combined with his disdain for Starship Aurora" and for my objectivist astronautics degree -- may indicate that he, too, "soars aloft in the night sky...afraid to face the dawn. -Monart
  8. That's an overly familiar (and easy to utter) phrase, "not to give sanction", often used to avoid facing real arguments. Also, observe that Don Watkins III, sensing that someone may pick out this maneuver, offers a "private" consultation -- presumably where he would not have to display his mentality in public. "They soar aloft in the night sky...afraid to face the dawn." -Monart
  9. Important typo corrections to my previous post: --- Following my rebuttal, Don Watkins III then wrote: "You're dropping context. We all benefit from Rand's work. That is no crime. The issue is trying to take from Rand benefits to which we are not entitled. The music you commissioned [sic,... --- It should have been typed as: "You're dropping context. We all benefit from Rand's work. That is no crime. The issue is trying to take from Rand benefits to which we are not entitled. The music you comissioned [sic]... === And Brian wrote, "Monart may, and possibly should, have the legal right to call his song what he wishes, but not the moral right. I don't think anyone should call their peiece [sic] ... --- It should have been typed as: And Brian wrote, "Monart may, and possibly should, have the legal right to call his song what he wishes, but not the moral right. I don't think anyone should call their peice [sic]... === I also apologize for any typos and other grammar mistakes in my post. (English is not my first language.)
  10. I've reviewed the criticisms against me and, in particular, against my producing the album Concerto of Deliverance for my pleasure and then presenting it to other Rand admirers for their own enjoyment. I've thought very carefully about this project from the beginning and, not only did I conclude that it's a *moral* thing to do, but a *glorious*, benevolent act as well. But, to be open-minded about this, I'm intrigued by the possibility that the critics here may have discerned a principle I'm not aware of. So I examined their arguments as stated in their posts, with the view that, even if I could not find a clear and consistent principle in their presentation, perhaps I could deduce a principle from the concrete examples they gave. The issue raised is important, not only to the “moral” status of the album Concerto of Deliverance, but also, in general, to how anyone should properly use and benefit from the work of Ayn Rand. In response to my first post introducing myself and presenting the new album Concerto of Deliverance -- giving a summary of and links to who I am, why and how the music was produced, and what it might sound like -- there were these following replies. Stephen Speicher condemns me as being "irrational", a "liar", an "intellectual and ethical fraud", who "immorally sought to reap benefit from the good name of Ayn Rand” and “selling his immoral product", which is "a clear violation of the property rights of Ayn Rand". Don Watkins III expressed "disgust... that he/the musician he hired had the gall to call their project 'The Concerto of Deliverance'. Morally, that is a violation of Rand's intellectual property rights. It is the attempt to confer the benefits she made possible on someone who has no right to them. For anyone who professes admiration for Rand to use her in this way is sickening.” My reply to these criticisms included the following: "Far from being ‘a clear violation of the property rights of Ayn Rand’, the album Concerto of Deliverance is a tribute to her achievement and, among other aims, a way to draw new readers to her works (which it is already doing). And I put my severance pay and savings, and my love and dedication to objectivism, to produce it. (Does anyone here expect me to give it out for free, other than the samples and insightful articles on the website?) "The US copyright laws says this: "Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases. In some cases, these things may be protected as trademarks." See US Copyright Office <http://www.loc.gov/copyright/> And there is no registered trademark for "Concerto of Deliverance". "As to my using and benefiting from Rand's works: don't all objectivists do? Is someone who makes a movie of Anthem (now in the public domain) being immoral? Is someone who names their children after characters in Rand's novels being immoral? Is calling a website or organization "Objectivist" being immoral? Is applying objectivism in one life and career, and making money from that being immoral? If it is, then we should all refrain from deriving any benefit from her, put her works in a vault, and make them taboo." Following my rebuttal, Don Watkins III then wrote: "You're dropping context. We all benefit from Rand's work. That is no crime. The issue is trying to take from Rand benefits to which we are not entitled. The music you commissioned [sic, even if it lived up to Rand's description of Halley's work, is aquiring [sic] an audience *simply* by using a title given value by Ayn Rand. It would have been fine had you called it something else, and said, "Inspired by Rand's description of Halley's Concerto of Deliverence [sic]." But to *call* it "Concerto of Deliverence [sic]" is intellectual fraud." And Brian wrote, "Monart may, and possibly should, have the legal right to call his song what he wishes, but not the moral right. I don't think anyone should call their peiece [sic] of music the Concerto of Deliverance. In everyone's minds it is a great masterpiece that we cannot hear but it selfcontained [sic] in Rand's novel. We each see it as something beautiful in our own way. And I think it should remain that way. It's something too precious to have someone try and bring it to reality." Collectively, the critics’ statements make this claim: that I am “immoral” and a “fraud” in producing and presenting an album called “Concerto of Deliverance”, because, in doing so, I am “violating (morally)” Rand’s “intellectual property rights”, and “reaping benefit” from what she created to which I wasn’t “entitled”. What were the reasons given to justify this claim of “moral violation and fraud”? I read and re-read the critics’ posts, but I could not find any. All that was stated was the repeated assertion of their claim, and comparisons of this Concerto of Deliverance album with other cases of people, in their projects, using words associated with Rand’s work. There were also appeals to Rand’s (presumably posthumous) “disapproval” of such things as this album. Even though the reason and principle upon which I am being charged with “immorality and fraud” is not given, I will analyze their claim, nonetheless, and try to discern its meaning and validity. First, the part of the claim pertaining to “violation of intellectual property rights”: As I have posted earlier, referring to the copyright laws, I did not violate her property rights, intellectual or other kinds. In response, then, the qualification, “moral” violation was insisted, without explaining what that means. Now, it is the case, that a violation of rights is an act committed in a socio-political context which integrally involves the use of force or fraud. But no such an act was committed by me or the composer. I certainly did not use force. Nor, did I use fraud -- as in, e.g., taking credit for, and pretending that the name and meaning of, “Concerto of Deliverance”, was of my own making. No, I do not; I clearly attribute the title to its source. Indeed, the title is a commemoration and a tribute to her work, as is clearly stated in the album booklet and the information on the website. So other than charges of forceful and fraudulent, i.e., legal, violation, what is “moral” violation? Now, I can understand cases where I can be immoral in producing the album, but which has nothing to do with Rand’s property rights, as in: if my wife or my daughters need life-saving and expensive medical treatment, but I take our remaining dollars and put it into this album -- *then* I’d be immoral, in sacrificing their higher value. But that wasn’t the case. So in what way am I being immoral (and in alleged “violation” of Rand’s property, or even in disrespect of her eminence)? The second part of the claim, that I’m benefiting from Rand’s work to which I have no right and am not entitled, is also difficult to make sense of. That’s why, in my previous post, I listed several kinds of ways in which someone could use and benefit from Rand’s work -- ways which, if they were “immoral” and should not be done, then her work should be made taboo. Then, the critics insisted on the qualification of “no right and not entitled to”, a qualification which doesn’t make the charge of immorality any clearer. I’m definitely not taking any of part of Rand’s work that I’m not “entitled to” or given “rights” to. I’m obviously not taking or copying a piece of music that Rand composed and calling it my property. So in what way am I using her work that I’m not entitled to? Don Watkins III gives a slight elaboration: The album “is aquiring [sic] an audience *simply* by using a title given value by Ayn Rand”. I don’t know what Watkins III means by “audience”, but if he believes that an audience is created that easily, he should produce an album called “Anthem”, or “Fountainhead”, or another “Concerto of Deliverance (once it becomes “moral” for him to do it). Without the genius required to create the music, the title will no more “acquire” an audience, than Clinton will acquire a following, wearing a T-shirt that says, “I am John Galt”. “The Concerto of Deliverance”, as a literary reference, is the title of Chapter VI, Part III, in Atlas Shrugged, and, within the story, is the name given by Richard Halley’s friends to his Fifth Concerto. The description by Ayn Rand of what the music sounded like to Dagny (when she first heard it whistled on the train during the scene that introduced her) is repeated when the music is described when played in the Valley near the end of the story. The title of the album I’m presenting is not “The Concerto of Deliverance”, indicating a supreme or ultimate or sui generic status. It is also *not* a depiction of Richard Halley’s Fifth Concerto. It is: “Concerto of Deliverance” -- implying that it is *a*: “Concerto of Deliverance”, an original work inspired by a contemplation of Rand’s description of such music. The composer, John Mills-Cockell, with literary guidance from the commissioner and executive producer, created this, his longest, most expansive work as his musical offering of the themes in Rand’s passage. This was the original commission, as shown in the numerous postings and updates on the web during the past two years, and now on the album’s website. I will quote, below, from the last pages of the album booklet, as indications of the relationship between the executive-producer, the composer, and Ayn Rand, in regards to the emergence of this album “Concerto of Deliverance”. Finally, a comment on Brian’s insistence that Rand’s description of the Concerto of Deliverance “is too precious to have someone try and bring it to reality”. If this is true, does that mean that *any* ideal depicted in Rand’s art (or formulated in her philosophy) too “precious” to bring into reality? If not, why then is only the Concerto of Deliverance is too precious? There is something wrong with this attitude, something which hold dreamers back from being real, something which I referred to in the Zarlenga poem I posted previously: “Soar aloft in the Night Sky…Afraid to face the dawn.” - Monart ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [From the album booklet for Concerto of Deliverance http://www.starshipaurora.com/albuminfo.html ] Monart Pon -Executive Producer Monart Pon immigrated to Canada from China when a boy. Here he found three of his passions: astronautics, philosophy, and music. He enjoys a diverse collection of music, including Dvorak, Debussy, Gershwin, Stivell, Elvis, and many, many others. He has a Master’s in the philosophy of astronautics and advocates the rational, libertarian advancement towards living in Space. <http://www.starshipaurora.com> Monart first heard John Mills-Cockell’s "Tillicum" & "December Angel" and first read Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, 30 years ago, and since then, wanted to hear a "Concerto of Deliverance" as created by his favorite composer. This album represents, for him, that desire achieved. ------- The Music of John Mills-Cockell John Mills-Cockell's music cuts across genres and breaks the bounds of traditional styles and instrumentation, melding together both familiar and newly synthesized sonorities. His musicality spans a wide range of styles and themes, embracing the dramatic and deep, the light and simple, the wistful and enchanted, the defiant and the triumphant, the joyous and the sad -- all imbued with freshness, equanimity, and integrity. A fountainhead of genius in our times, John Mills-Cockell’s sunlit music ennobles and sets fire to the soul. John Mills-Cockell demonstrates his incomparable mastery of the New Music, when he creates -- with superb clarity, intensity, sincerity, confidence, and grace -- such profoundly moving and philosophical themes as those of "deliverance". His music can challenge, comfort, and cheer one's relentless movement towards the realization of life's beauty and happiness. It's that powerful. An unusual musical adventure of discovery, remembrance, and arrival -- this Concerto of Deliverance. - Monart Pon, a fan Email: [email protected] ------ About Ayn Rand (1905-1982) Ayn Rand is a celebrated champion of free thought, free trade, individual rights, and romantic heroism. She wrote: "My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." [‘About the Author’, Atlas Shrugged] "At the dawn of their lives, men seek a noble vision of man's nature and of life's potential...the sense that one's life is important, that great achievements are within one's capacity, and that great things lie ahead." [‘Introduction’, The Fountainhead] "She sat listening to the music. It was a symphony of triumph. The notes flowed up, they spoke of rising and they were the rising itself, they were the essence and the form of upward motion, they seemed to embody every human act and thought that had ascent as its motive. It was a sunburst of sound, breaking out of hiding and spreading open. It had the freedom of release and the tension of purpose. It swept space clean, and left nothing but the joy of an unobstructed effort. Only a faint echo within the sounds spoke of that from which the music had escaped, but spoke in laughing astonishment at the discovery that there was no ugliness or pain, and there never had had to be. It was the song of an immense deliverance."[‘Concerto of Deliverance’, Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, 1957] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  11. I see that the show "Firefly" has not been mentioned here, so, in case someone here hasn't seen it before, I should recommend it, highly. Firefly, unfortunately, was canceled from TV, mid-season in 2002. Fortunately, it's now on DVD and a movie is in the works. I'm finding that everyone I'm recommending it to enjoys it immensely; it's high individualism and romanticism, funny and philosophical, thrillingly plotful and visually stunning, witty and repeatedly watchable. I've bought my daughters each a set of their own, and they're showing it around too. My wife and I have watched through it 8 times now, enjoyed it every time, and are looking forward to the next time, soon. I've appended, below, earlier posts about it, elsewhere. The latest, great news is that the movie version, "Serenity", is scheduled for release April 22, 2005. Monart ~ * ~ Concerto of Deliverance <http://www.starshipaurora.com/concertoofdeliverance.html> Starship Aurora <http://www.starshipaurora.com> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: OWL: "Firefly" Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 17:35:38 -0600 From: Monart Pon <[email protected]> Organization: Starship Aurora To: OWL <[email protected]> To add another topic to the List: The "Firefly" TV series is to be resurrected in the "Serenity" film. There's hope for the culture yet, and something inspiring and enjoyable to look forward to. Previously, I posted elsewhere: Subject: [starship_Forum] "Firefly" on DVD Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 From: Monart Pon To: Starship Forum [email protected]> "Firefly", the unusually entertaining and provocative TV series that was canceled by Fox last year is now available on DVD, all 14 episodes on 4 discs (from Amazon.com or Chapters.ca, at discounted prices). This may be your only chance to watch this revolutionary show that's sure to please any rational, romantic individualist. I'm hoping for a resurrection of the show. Subject: [starship_Forum] TV Show Worth Watching: "Firefly" Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 From: Monart Pon To: [email protected] Another starship TV series worth watching is Firefly": about a civilian transport ship and crew, out and about doing freelancing work, set in a future where Earth is "all used up", and humanity has colonized numerous systems, but a collectivist Alliance is seeking to gain centralized control over the colonists. What's different about this well produced show is the pioneer "wild west" flavor of the worlds and aboard the Firefly ship "Serenity", with a mix of hi-tech and low tech gear, and with country-western southern accents. The captain and crew are a band of varied and interesting characters, including the unpredictable but decent captain, a mysterious preacher, an aristocratic doctor and his recovering brain-washed genius sister, a female "Companion", a woman engineer, a married couple, and an ex-mercenary. --- Other previous postings: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Starship_Forum/message/2478 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Starship_Forum/message/2480 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Starship_Forum/message/2601 Movie Announcement posted at: http://www.fireflyfans.net/news.asp?newsid=473
  12. Far from being "a clear violation of the property rights of Ayn Rand", the album Concerto of Deliverance is a tribute to her achievement and, among other aims, a way to draw new readers to her works (which it is already doing). And I put my severance pay and savings, and my love and dedication to objectivism, to produce it. (Does anyone here expect me to give it out for free, other than the samples and insightful articles on the website?) The US copyright laws says this: "Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases. In some cases, these things may be protected as trademarks." See US Copyright Office <http://www.loc.gov/copyright/> And there is no registered trademark for "Concerto of Deliverance". As to my using and benefiting from Rand's works: don't all objectivists do? Is someone who makes a movie of Anthem (now in the public domain) being immoral? Is someone who names their children after characters in Rand's novels being immoral? Is calling a website or organization "Objectivist" being immoral? Is applying objectivism in one life and career, and making money from that being immoral? If it is, then we should all refrain from deriving any benefit from her, put her works in a vault, and make them taboo. As to my introductory post being an "ad": it was not such. It did not prompt people to buy, it did not state a price, and it's style was not commercial. It was an introduction to who I am and what I do, and a goodwill gesture and offer to anyone here who may be interested in checking out a new possible source of esthetic pleasure. If my messages get deleted from here and I get banned, it would not be because of a violation of policy, but because of them being perceived as an affront to the vocal ones here. I know that the respondents do not represent everyone who read my posts, but those who did reply, did so with immediate unfriendliness, suspicion, mockery, sarcasm, and insult, all without the expected objectivist logic and evidence. Instead of judging me for who I am, they tried to fit me in categories of their own making so as to dismiss me and intimidate others here who are watching in the background. Whatever you respondents try to make me out to be, the evidence posted here shows who you and I really are (to anyone who judges for themselves. To add to all that I've posted here so far, and for the benefit of the non-posting readers here, I offer the following as a point of reflection on what's going on here. ------ They Soar Aloft in the Night Sky To be free in their minds in their imaginations in their consciousness, they soar aloft in the night sky, alone in their brain, that's what freedom is to them. When one comes who tells them it can be done in the real world, he is hated because he destroys the inner beauty of their dream. Their mind is their reality. They live vicariously, destroying their enemy with their dream. They soar aloft in the night sky afraid to face the dawn. -Peter Zarlenga _The Orator_, 1976 + ------ -Monart ~ * ~ Concerto of Deliverance <http://www.starshipaurora.com/concertoofdeliverance.html> Starship Aurora <http://www.starshipaurora.com>
  13. A "neo" objectivist, as distinguished from an "old" objectivist, is a new, usually younger, objectivist, born within the last two decades, who may not be bound by the habits and traditions of the previous generations of objectivists from the 60's and 70's, who are non-sectarian, non-insular, non-conformist -- open to new ideas, even if those ideas are not "approved" by the orthodoxy -- and thus are more curious, benevolent, and attractive. These neo objectivists can be found anywhere, including here -- although they tend to frequent places with open skies and fresh air, where there isn't stifling and noxious airs of pretentious in-groupies and envious mediocrities. Thanks for your questions, Betsy. (I've seen your name and postings here and there over the years. Is Stephen still your husband? He's too quick with sour sarcasm, sure to turn people off.) Monart ~ * ~ Concerto of Deliverance <http://www.starshipaurora.com/concertoofdeliverance.html> Starship Aurora <http://www.starshipaurora.com>
  14. Betsy, I've been asked that question numerous times, so I'll forward an answer I've given before: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [FAM] "objectivist astronauts" Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 12:31:55 -0600 From: Monart Pon <[email protected]> > Forgive me if you've explained this already, but what > university gives a Masters in Space Settlement? > > Marsha Hi Marsha, Although I'm trying to stay on vacation from the Web, I want to answer your question. I know of your interest and your fine work in Education. What university grants a "Masters in Space Settlement", and more, in "objectivist space settlement"? In my case: A university that didn't know what hit them, people who didn't really know what they were letting into their program by accepting my proposal. A university with an independent, non-standard, multi-inter-disciplinary department (CRE: "Committee on Resources and the Environment) that was well-funded, probably because most of the research was in environmentalism. A university that had the professors I found to want to be on the 3-4 years-long thesis committee: an engineer, a philosopher, a political scientist, and at first an ecologist -- who each had their own reasons to be there. A university who had a chairman of CRE, a biologist, who was supportive enough of the thesis and provided grants for the research. After four long years and two attempts, I convinced the thesis committee to grant a Masters in "objectivist astronautics", as printed right on the Degree, from the University of Calgary in 1985 (a Canadian Provincial university of 25,000+ students and 4000+ faculty & staff <http://www.ucalgary.ca/UofC/about/>) The thesis, in a newly defined field called "objectivist astronautics", has the title of _Starship Astronaut: Rational Egoist_. More details about this were in an OWL post last year, which I've copied, below. Thanks for asking, Marsha. Monart ~ * ~ ----- Original Message ----- To: OWL <[email protected] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 Subject: "objectivist astronautics" Bill, Thanks for asking about "objectivist astronautics". When the university asked for the name of the field of research, it was the best name I could think of. The degree was granted by a multi-inter-disciplinary body called the "Committee on Resources and the Environment" at the University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. I had been searching for a department that would accept my proposal for research into the philosophical presuppositions of space colonization, and this Committee (CRE) couldn't find enough reasons to refuse my bold offer, which also fulfilled all their forms and prerequisites. I spent the next four years investigating the technological, cultural, and intellectual implications of the space colonies project proposed by Gerard O'Neill, in particular, and of the astronautics industry, in general. I studied philosophy, anthropology, psychology, sociology, economics, technological theory, environmental design, religion, utopias, more objectivism, and bits of many other subjects. I then applied the objectivist philosophy to my analysis and presented my findings to CRE, having to submit the thesis twice because of, you guessed it, the objectivist philosophy. I succeeded, though, and there, printed on my degree, below "Master of Arts" is "Objectivist Astronautics". [...] Monart
  15. Hello, I'm a new subscriber to this forum and would like to introduce myself to those of you who don't know me from other venues. I've been studying, using, and benefiting from Rand's work on objectivism since 1971, when her Fountainhead motivated me to switch from astrophysics to philosophy and earn a BA in philosophy and a MA in objectivist astronautics. I've been active in promoting and advocating the philosophy in various projects, and my latest project is a significant example. To round out this introduction to what I'm about -- who I am, what I'm after, and how I'm doing it -- is the new album, titled "Concerto of Deliverance" by John Mills-Cockell, that I've commissioned and produced, an album inspired by Rand's description of such music in Atlas Shrugged. An invitational message is appended below to lead you to more information. The production of the album is an independent project, done mainly out of love and goodwill (a "mom and pop" venture) -- but this is a high-class album depicting an expansive world of beauty and excitement, offered for your enjoyment. Thank you. Monart ~ * ~ Some of you may remember two years ago when I announced the project to create a Concerto of Deliverance by John Mills-Cockell. Now, since July 4, 2004, the album of the music is finally here! What does it sound like? What might it sound it? What should it sound like? Will it make a difference? Now you can find out for yourself. Information on the album -- its contents, samples, profiles, composer's notes, reviews, etc. -- are available at http://www.starshipaurora.com/concertoofdeliverance.html Reviewers of the work have included musicians and philosophers, with diverse responses. I've appended excerpts from one reviews (go to the website for the authorship). -Monart ======= Concerto of Deliverance, by John Mills-Cockell ...satisfying resolution...an integrated work ...the music moves freely through American spiritual, American Indian, American western, Asian, Spanish, jazz, rock, symphonic, march, Gregorian chant, modern Persian, traditional Chinese, etc. I also enjoy the blurring of the line between what is typically thought of as orchestral/classical/grownup music, and group/rock/kid music. My guess is that your most enthusiastic customers among objectivists will be the under 30 neo objectivist crowd, who are used to and eager for new sounds, different sounds, pretty themes that aren't pretty the way their parents like them... The rhythm changes constantly. Even during the segments where it remains constant, Mills-Cockell varies the way the rhythm is played, or changes the synthesizer registration used to play it. The key changes constantly... My own musical taste inclines toward the extremely complex, which is, I think, what explains my ability to enjoy this brand new piece despite my usual preferences for ancient music... The piece is extremely linear, which is another feature I find endearing. Chords are arpeggiated throughout, so the structure and logic is perhaps less obvious to some people if their preference is for music that is chiefly made up a vertical chords. As might be expected given what I've said so far, I have a strong personal preference for perpetual motion and steady rhythms without percussion. I'm pleasantly surprised by this piece's ability to seduce me despite the fact that it is more like modern music and less like German baroque in this regard. The effect of constant movement is maintained partly by the tensions created by the elements I mentioned earlier, as well as the linear structure. I think it speaks to the universality of the music that Mills-Cockell is able to capture the attention of someone so happily entrenched in the early music tradition... Sometimes Mills-Cockell weaves back and forth between acknowledgment/experience of pain and joy; sometimes the pain hovers in the background, unrecognized or forgotten but still a part of history, while fun and happiness take over. Evil lurks, that's just a fact: But it never wins. Nicely done... =======
×
×
  • Create New...