exaltron

I'm very aware of Rand's predilection for "tiddlywink" music, and I know better than to attribute anything to Rand that doesn't come from an authoritative source: Q: "What composers do you recommend today?" A: "Buy yourself some classical records. I cannot listen to modern music. I can't hear it. It's anything but music." [Ford Hall Forum, 1981] From Ayn Rand Answers, p. 226, Edited by Robert Mayhew Great book incidentally- contains some amazing insights into her genius. One questioner asks about a specific choice of a word in Atlas and she shoots back a lengthy and flawlessly reasoned explanation for that choice. It was lazy of me to paraphrase though, should have known better. Are you talking about freestyling "off the dome". I'm amazed at anyone who can do that and still make sense (Eminem is an obvious example), but I think the stuff that's worth listening to is written and refined more than a little to get the right flow, rhythm, phrasing, etc. So put some lyrics up why don't you?

TCM is showing the Fountainhead this Friday at 12:45 PM EST. I'm definitely TIVOing it- my favorite part is where Dominique rides up to Roark on horseback and wacks him with the riding crop. Now that is some love.

As an objectivist hip-hop artist, I've been reading this thread with intense interest. I recently read a quote from Rand where she basically said classical music is the only music, that all modern "music" is unlistenable garbage. This is one point where I would definitely have to part ways with Rand. I understand how classical music in some ways fits in with objectivism- it requires a fierce concentration and focus, an immense amount of planning and discipline and most importantly it is a genre that could be said to have the best track record for passionate sense-of-life aesthetics. The problem for me is that it doesn't really do it for me. When I listen to classical- and believe me I've tried many different composers, I just don't connect with it the way I connect with more modern styles. I can appreciate it on an intellectual level, but I don't find it as evocative as I do the more creative and passionate examples of hip-hop, dance and rock. So are certain genres more or less likely to lend themselves to a positive sense-of-life? I would say yes, for example, Punk music was started by a group of people who were basically anarchists, both politically and aesthetically. They made it a point *not* to try to sound good, not to practice, not to sing on key (I think if you're trying to sing, you should sing on key). Hip-hop is also associated with a somewhat nihilistic group of artists, though I would say most are more Wynandesque in their premises. They want money, power, success- all the things that bands like Radiohead reject, by the way- but they couldn't really tell you why these things are good or signify something morally or spiritually good. Of course, the thug mentality is something that was thrust onto hip-hop in the late eighties by groups like NWA. Before that, the message and the aesthetic of hip-hop was mostly positive if somewhat simplistic (though I think a lot of the artists did quite well considering the brain-mushing they must have been given in inner-city schools back then). If you go back and listen to Sugar Hill Gang, Run-DMC, Kurtis-Blow, and even more recently groups like A Tribe Called Quest and Digable Planets (who were peers or the West Coast 'gangsta rappers', there is nothing in their lyrics that glorifies violence, crime, degrading women, etc. I believe I share with most posters in this thread a distaste for the thug mentality that is pervasive in 90% of today's rap, as well as the musical aesthetic that favors dumbed-downed minimalist beats that are repeated ad infinitum, often stolen as one poster pointed out, and usually not even given the benefit of any interesting melody, chord structure or rhythmic complexity. I was inspired to do a hip-hop CD just having grown up with hip-hop and feeling excited about the possibility of trying to create something truly musical and evocative out of it along with my passion for objectivism (though I've made it a point not to be didactic in my rapping and singing- but simply to express the things I love). I'm very happy with the results and am really amped to release the CD, 5x5, next month. I would love to hear some honest feedback from people on this board- here are some links: Objectivism Online exclusive pre-release of 20,000 Volts Lyrics for the first two tracks My blog ad gloriam, exaltron

Dismuke, that was hilarious!! belongs in the pantheon of brilliant objectivist satire! Um, I think I meant the canon of brilliant objectivist satire.. pantheon is for people.

Thanks JMS and softwareNerd! I think I got it.

Here's a photo of me at the now defunkt Apocalypse lounge in NYC -seemed like a great place for objectivist hip-hop For some reason, I can't get my photo to come up under my username on my posts. Can anyone help me out w/ this?

Cool thanks! Are you actively playing the trumpet? got any mp3s? I'm checking out the LARUI blog and it's a good mix- I wish I could get myself to update more consistently like that. Keep it up! ps, Not a signed artist yet, but I'm optimistic. What made you think I was, just out of curiosity?

Actually I don't think Rand would have agreed that a moral man in real life in the same situation shouldn't do the same thing. The same has been suggested about the "rape scene" in the Fountainhead- that it was a "literary device"- but I seriously doubt she would have seen a real life Dominique as a victim of actual rape given everything described in that scene. Rand was a master of pushing moral questions to the extreme to demonstrate her point: was it moral for Rourke to blow up the housing project? Was it moral for Steve to kill Breckinridge in Think Twice? She absolutely leaves no place for the fence-sitters and wafflers. I think the point of putting Galt in that position is to show an extreme case of the morality of second-handedness. Galt knew that Mouch, JT and the rest of them needed him to live or they would all perish. He knew that they were not totally irrational or suicidal and my interpretation of that act is that by giving him the fix for the torture device, he was forcing them to see how much they needed him and how they were really trying to destroy the good. Now, my sense is that Ranil, your question is more about the "ethics of emergencies", ie, is it ok to lie if someone has a gun to your head? Absolutely. The classic example I always here my objectivist friends use (I don't know if this is from Rand or not) is if a murderer comes to your house and asks where your wife is, the moral thing to do is lie through your teeth.

Cool blogs! Great Rand quote re achieving life too. I have one that I've worked pretty hard on mostly chronicaling my career as an objectivist MC/musician/composer. I also have a lot of opinion pieces on stuff like politics, philosophy, etc. www.exaltron.com/blog

Yo, speaking of great lyricists, have you heard of this musician/MC exaltron? Check it out: Focus I gladly cop to the so-called sin of pride I put it all on number one and I let it ride cuz I know that my philosophy is bona fide And I never give an inch to the opposite side friends and foes feel my flows from nose to toes in the city of no dozin closin in on a cure for tha moral twerpitude I don't wanna have to hurtcha dude but if you step to 'dis I will do you like Brutus not cuz you ambitious but your aim is malicious meretricious bitches try to grab my riches but I ain't tryinna waste my energy on new and different ways to slay my enemies never shrink from my responsibility never blink in the face of adversity from Marseilles to Bombay I waylay the PKs undermine the spineless with sublime rhymes and basslines And I always focus on the positive recognizing that the best revenge is to live haters obfuscate, instigate, complicate lust for the power to control your fate but we don't sweat them we gon' forget them we gon let them set their own death lay them to rest cuz they've already confessed implicitly that they're guilty of the worst hypocrisy complicit in the worst atrocities precipitated by depraved philosophies advocating the rejection of the rational in favor of the blatantly fantastical now they try to put obstacles up in my path try to pull the plug on my bubble bath party poopers and storm troopers ain't even a threat naked lady mudflaps is all you gon' get now I'm talkin bout myself and I know why you're hatin some serious wealth is what I'm creatin psychological health is what I'm demonstratin take it somewhere else if your aim is instigatin I ain't cuban, puerto rican, haitian or jamaican my ethnicity officially is "straight money-makin" I take down statists with a well-placed brickbat expose their long noses and two-faced kickbacks gettin sharp cheddar like I'm from wisconsin takin out these thugs like I'm charles bronson no guns but I'm causing mass casualties pummeling the parasites perpetually intelligence cuz my logic is aristotalean eloquence cuz my rhymes are sesquipedalian I got the technique and the culinary know-how spicy -I'll burn your tongue like some kung pao Mr. Scott blowin spots cuz I gotz da stugots buckshot on these flocks talkin poc trellat I rock the bomba clots, outfox the despots Scotch their rotten plots and mock their mental schlock from concretes to concepts and all the way back from the simplest perceptions to the most abstract it ain't worth smack if it ain't about facts so the faculty of reason is what they attack And I always focus on the positive recognizing that the best revenge is to live haters obfuscate, instigate, complicate lust for the power to control your fate ..file under shameless self-promotion. 'Focus' will be on my upcoming CD five by five, but you can hear part of this song here. Check out www.exaltron.com/blog for updates. ad gloriam exaltron

Unfortunately I think this guy actually has read Rand and knows what it's about, but chooses to willfully ignore and/or obfuscate the issues. I do think that the response from our little cult helped to balance the scales though. I was very happy to see this guy get barraged with very coherent retorts to his vomitous diatribe. Of course he could always use the response as fodder for a follow-up smear, but I think the reason he stopped responding to the comments was because he doesn't want to create a forum for positive exposition of Rand's ideas. My sense is that people who are impartial, uninitiated and otherwise unpolluted would tend to walk away from the debate with the impression that: a. objectivists certainly aren't as cultish or dogmatic as he portrays them b. you can't judge a book by the smear job that attempts to discredit it. At the very least, I think the return-fire threw a wrench in this villain's evil plan to smear Rand and Objectivism. I don't advocate playing "whack-a-mole", but I do think if some of these jokers can be attacked guerilla style by a small but well-armed and skilled militia, it could do a lot of good for the proliferation of rational ideas. Scott

Indubitably and well-put I might add. I shudder to think how many productive hours of achievement is wasted every day by well-meaning Objectivists trying to mop up such smear-jobs. It does feel good to see an evader with an audience getting beaten with his own weak, severed limbs.

I am having a blast, along with a few other Objectivists, launching a full-scale napalm assault on this pathetic little Rand-hater, Richard Martin: Here's my response to his crappy Molotov cocktail: If anyone here wants to add their $.02.. although it's almost too easy.

For editorial comics, I highly recommend Cox and Forkum. They manage to distill highly advanced philosophical and political messages into single square comics that are almost as hilarious as they are insightful. If you're looking for comic books, there is a graphic novelist, Bosch Fawstin, who has a book out called Table for One which is excellent. A bit heavy on the objectivist puns, but I think that's part of the comic book aesthetic.. Scott

One way to put the blowing up of the housing project into context is this: imagine you're a musician and you've released a recording under contract with a copyright. Then you discover some wanker in Beijing is selling 1000s of bootleg copies of your recording on eBay. You report this to the local authorities, but they refuse to intervene. Now, despite the fact that mr. bootlegger may have actually paid for the blank CDs and cases etc, you would have every right to destroy "his property" as he has violated your rights. I don't see how Rourkes blowing up the housing projects differs at all in principle. I have no problem with taking that entire scene as both literal (he actually did it in the book, it wasn't a figurative act) and completely moral. Scott

I would have to disagree with recommending ITOE to a ninth grader. Granted c_s is obviously way ahead of most of his/her peers in seeking out answers vis a vis objectivism, but I started with OPAR when I was in my late 20s (with a college degree and lots of experience with philosophy) and I still struggled with it. I thing Peikoff's OPAR has enough epistemology to get started in objectivism, plus Rand's VOS and FTNI, etc., along with the concise and (relatively simple) thrusts of the ARI resources recommended by Harald. Good Luck c_s, yours is the glorry!!! Scott

I think "the selfish nature of man" is a problematic phrase on many levels. As others in this thread and Branden have pointed out, man can act for his own destruction. But the important thing to keep in mind is that man is a "rational animal", meaning he has the capacity and the need to be rational. Whatever instinct he possesses will not help him without the ability to form concepts, plan, pursue value, and of course pursue his own selfish interests. But saying that man is a rational animal does not mean this is automatic, so in that sense the Marxists have it right in saying that man can "overcome his selfish nature". The important question is, why would he want or need to? Scott

hey all- Great posts, and a perfect opportunity for me to add a little self-promo. I'm an objectivist MC (yup)/guitarist/trumpeter working on a self-produced rap CD that is positive sense of life/pro-reason throughout. I just finished the first single, 20,000 volts, which you can check out at my website: www.exaltron.com - you can also find the lyrics on the homepage as well (right-hand column). Here's a small sample of the lyrics: Underhanded bandits got their hands in my pocket fingers in the socket tryinna drain my flow but they can't tap the source cuz they know not whence and now they're comin up against an electric fence stolen concepts tapped to the limit circuit breakers gonna trip any minute the context droppin and mind-stoppin brutes mow down the orchards but they still want the fruits Jack-booted thugs in cahoots with the looters the roots provided by intellectual polluters and they shoot down any threat to their self-deception reject the concept of natural selection I've been playing and producing instrumental electronica for about 10 yrs and just recently have decided to get serious about doing lyrics. It's been a blast so far- I just did my first major performance over New Year's to an objectivist crowd (some of whom may be on here) and the response was overwhelming. I had assumed that Oist hip-hop would be a very difficult sell, but apparently it's not hip-hop per se that objectivists hate, but the vast majority of hip-hop that's out there that is to varying degrees anti-life. at any rate, I would love to hear what people think of it. ad gloriam, exaltron (aka scott)