Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
monart

Intro To Monart Pon & Concerto Of Deliverance

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

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...

=======

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

What is "objectivist astronautics" and can you really get an MA in it?

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...

What is a "neo objectivist" and where can one find their the "crowd?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is "objectivist astronautics" and can you really get an MA in it?

Well, according to his web site:

"I define 'Astronautics' as the industry whose ultimate purpose is to create the starship of man, the mobile home that comforts and moves him forward and upward, to any part of the unbounded universe of stars."

And,

[Objectivism] is the philosophy that promotes the purpose of creating the starship of man. Starship is the home that comes from man living rationally to achieve his happiness. Thus, Ayn Rand’s objectivist philosophy is pro-man and pro-astronautics."

I guess the "MA" then is somewhat symbolic.

But, I must say he puts his "objectivist astronautics" to good use. He seems to support "creating a free country in space," consisting of "10,000 rational, productive, and proud people -- willing to live and fight for their own happiness." You can learn more about this from the Constitution of the Republic of Minerva. http://www.starshipaurora.com/minerva.html

Fortunately, to get the project going, the first suggestion was to contact The Objectivist Center. ARI came in second.

What is a "neo objectivist" and where can one find their the "crowd?"

I would suggest looking in all of the usual places. He links to the various Kelleyite groups, and sundry bizarre creatures. His "Starship Aurora" gives new meaning to "far out."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DPW    4

What really disgusts me is 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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What really disgusts me is 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.

Maybe ethics is not the same as on Earth when you live on the Starship Aurora in outer space. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DPW    4
Maybe ethics is not the same as on Earth when you live on the Starship Aurora in outer space.  :(

I guess that's why Rand specified that Objectivism was a philosophy for living on earth. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an aspiring composer who has listened to the excerpts from the piece, I think that this "Concerto of Deliverance" is pleasant at best but hardly a Richard Halley masterpiece. For one, it does not demonstrate much artistic integrity: the composer tries to blend too many different styles of music into one work (reminds me of the second-hander architects from The Fountainhead).

Stick with Rachmaninoff. Some of his works (and not just from the piano concertos--you have to delve into his orchestral and choral works to appreciate Rachmaninoff fully) are exactly what I imagine when I read Ayn Rand's descriptions.

I agree that it was improper to hijack the title of the piece from Atlas Shrugged. Just write music to the best of your ability and let listeners judge for themselves whether it agrees with their notions of the sound of deliverance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a Concerto of Deliverence?! I listened to the excerpts, and I felt there should be some magic mushrooms growing on the dew of the grass outside my place. And then I could be led by the dwarves to the spaceship!

If that was supposed to be inspired by her description of Halley's piece, I suggest they actually read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he has gotten his passion for Objectivism mixed up with his passion for Star Trek. Perhaps he sees Objectivism as a means to some sort of star trek fantasy, which in its essence isn’t an entirely idiotic notion. Surely if the United States space program was completely privatized and cultured under an ideal capitalistic society it would be much further along and perhaps he sees himself at the helm of one of its hypothetical vessels (maybe with seven of nine giving him a back massage :dough: ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is "objectivist astronautics" and can you really get an MA in it?

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 <monart@starshipaurora.com>

> 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 <objectivism@wetheliving.com

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is a "neo objectivist" and where can one find their the "crowd?"

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>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.)

Is this just flame bait? I hardly think it's worth answering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know know how many of you use another site but you can also check him out at this link. http://www.theatlasphere.com/directory/profile.php?id=1686 " ...if you, in the unlikely event, have information about my lost origins." I don't know whether to treat that in the immigrant ripped from an opprevisive past or the scientologist sense.

I thought the music sounded a bit like a combination of new-age and something else I'm not quite sure about. It looks like it's a combination of new age, Objectivism, and Neo-Tech or Scientology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole neo-objectivist stuff is ludicrous, not to mention an attempt to smuggle an Ad hominem on the very people who gave us Objectivism.

I am tired of this discussion already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A "neo" objectivist, as distinguished from an "old" objectivist,

No. A "neo-objectivist," as you use the term, is one like yourself who wants to have his Objectivism, and eat it too. You want the benefit that accrues from the philosophy as a whole, but you pick bits and pieces supplemented with a healhty dose of your own private irrationalism. You are a fraud, plain and simple, an intellectual and ethical fraud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This whole neo-objectivist stuff is ludicrous, not to mention an attempt to smuggle an Ad hominem on the very people who gave us Objectivism.

I am tired of this discussion already.

Since you are a moderator, may I suggest that you remove the ad for his music, which, as Don Watkins properly noted, is a clear violation of the property rights of Ayn Rand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since you are a moderator, may I suggest that you remove the ad for his music, which, as Don Watkins properly noted, is a clear violation of the property rights of Ayn Rand.

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>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DPW    4
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".

That's why I said it was morally a violation of Rand's intellectual property rights. Anyone who has read Rand's letters, knows her attitude regarding the use of her characters' names and the like - she did not approve of it, nor should she have.

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.
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, even if it lived up to Rand's description of Halley's work, is aquiring 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." But to *call* it "Concerto of Deliverence" is intellectual fraud.

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.)

With that, I agree completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 of music the Concerto of Deliverance. In everyone's minds it is a great masterpiece that we cannot hear but it selfcontained 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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephen,

I would say this is a moral issue, not a legal one.

As for me removing this or that post - I don't have the authority to do this, except in cases where "there is absolutely no intellectual content". I warned monart for his ad hominem, and if necessary I can suspend his posting rights - but to delete a post/thread or to ban a person I leave to the admins. You can use the Report mechanism or send a PM to GreedyCapitalist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's why I said it was morally a violation of Rand's intellectual property rights.

It may be more than that. I remember hearing of an incident where someone attempted to use the name "Galt's Gulch" for a ski resort (I believe) in Colorado - and AR was to able to get them to stop. It's a name, but a unique name, intimately connected with her copyrighted work.

An expert in copyright law would know better than I.

That he doesn't really care of course is fully consistent with the dishonesty inherent in something called "neo-Objectivism" which consists (as Stephen said) in hijacking the name to provide some stature it could never achieve on its own, taking from it what you want and rejecting the rest, even if (as must be the case) the result is a contradictory mess.

Fred Weiss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The US copyright laws says ...

You seek to reap the benefits based on the good name of Ayn Rand, while simultaneously distorting the philosophy which she created. As I said, you are an intellectual and ethical fraud.

but those who did reply, did so with immediate unfriendliness, suspicion, mockery, sarcasm, and insult, all without the expected objectivist logic and evidence.

That is an outright lie. Unless you are so naive that you do not consider your own writings on your web site, and your own writings on the internet -- writings that I even quoted in my post -- to be evidence of your character and thought. I know it is hard for you to believe, I know that you would prefer to make believe that there is another explanation, but my and others distaste for you is based on who and what you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stephen,

I would say this is a moral issue, not a legal one.

As for me removing this or that post - I don't have the authority to do this, except in cases where "there is absolutely no intellectual content". I warned monart for his ad hominem, and if necessary I can suspend his posting rights - but to delete a post/thread or to ban a person I leave to the admins. You can use the Report mechanism or send a PM to GreedyCapitalist.

Maybe I was not clear. I was not talking about deleting his posts or banning him -- which would be a good idea anyway -- but rather I meant to remove reference to the URL which points to the product that he has immorally sought to reap benefit from the good name of Ayn Rand. I see he also has that URL in his every post. I think those references should be deleted too.

You should know that this character has spammed virtually every (even remotely) Objectivist site on the internet with the same message selling his immoral product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It may be more than that. I remember hearing of an incident where someone attempted to use the name "Galt's Gulch" for a ski resort (I believe) in Colorado - and AR was to able to get them to stop. It's a name, but a unique name, intimately connected with her copyrighted work.

I remember something like that too, but I cannot now recall the details. I know that Peikoff once initiated legal action against a band for their use of the name "Atlas Shrugged," thereby upholding the estate of Ayn Rand. But, anyway, in the June 1968 issue of the Objectivist Ayn Rand explicated A Statement of Policy, and in the second part of the article her lawyer detailed abuses that were not to tolerated. Here is one reference to attempting to usurp the name of "Galt's Gulch."

"The sincere and authentic students of Objectivism have nothing to gain from the pretentious purveyors of pirated ideas; nor have they anything to learn from the pundits whose understanding of Objectivist principles consists of being able to recite the axiom that A is A; nor have they any value to seek from those "practical" men of action who propose to organize an 'Atlantis' or a 'Galt's Gulch' in the jungles of South America."

That he doesn't really care of course is fully consistent with the dishonesty inherent in something called "neo-Objectivism" which consists (as Stephen said) in hijacking the name to provide some stature it could never achieve on its own, taking from it what you want and rejecting the rest, even if (as must be the case) the result is a contradictory mess.

These sort of characters always remind me of what used to be the standard menu in American Chinese restaurants. For a set price you would get to choose one or more items from group A, group B, group C, etc. Replace the "group" and its elements with Objectivist "epistemology," "ethics," "politics," etc. and they get to pick a few things they like from each category. But, just like the old bromide about after eating Chinese food, you are hungry again for philosophy in an hour. :nerd:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×