Bold Standard
-
Posts
839 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Bold Standard
-
-
"Ayn Rand developed her doctrine of Objectivism as a result of her upbringing during the Communist reign in Russia and the Russian Revolution"
But if you're interested in reading a very bad, poorly argued, generally fallacious book that actually has a similar theme to what you're describing, there is a book called Ayn Rand: the Russian Radical, by Chris Matthew Sciabarra. It's hardly intelligible, but from the bits I've read, he does seem to be trying to argue that Ayn Rand was in some respects a product of her environment. I wouldn't spend money on it, but if you have a big library near you; they might have it, which might or might not help you on your paper (all of the biographical material from the Ayn Rand bookstore is much better, but maybe less specifically consistent with your thesis).
-
I am currently enrolled in a World History class where we have been assigned an Independant Study Unit. In this assignment, we are asked to pick a significant person in history and explain how they are a product of their environment.
I'm afraid that Ayn Rand is probably the worst (i.e., most difficult) person you could pick for this assignment. If anyone is a refutation of the idea that people are "only" products of their environments, it would be her. Her environment produced millions of people who did nothing, or perished in communist slavery, or escaped and did various things--but only one her. There is nothing specific to her environment, as far as I know, that would help to explain why this happened. It was all her own choices, which were a product of her ego (or "soul" if you'd rather--I mean, her identity; her self, not anything supernatural), not her environment, that made her who she was.
If you want someone easy and interesting.. Pick someone like.. Hm, Jesus would be pretty easy. All he had to do was live up to a bunch of myths and legends and "prophesies," prevalent in his culture at the time, and he was deified. But.. in any case you examine, it seems to me that the most interesting aspects of it are those in which they were the exception.. i.e., "X was a product of his environment in repsects A, B, and C.. but he was able to originate idea Y all on his own, which made him unique and different from others in his environment." Someone who is truly a product of his environment and nothing more would probably not end up being important or successful or noticed at all--at least, in a free or semi-free country.
-
I will add that at times I hear otherwise good music from decades ago and wish that someone would update it with the technology available now, because the production quality is so poor I won't listen to it.
Me too! There are a lot of songs that I want to redo, and a lot of songs I wish other people would redo. There is also a lot of old music that could at least use a really good re-mastering, to take out the hiss and fix the EQ. [edit: but I mean, as in, early 20th century stuff. I don't think of the '80s as "decades ago" because, that makes me feel old. And they did have some really good recording equipment and techniques even then--see Cocteau Twins' "Victorialands" album, for instance.. or, even earlier than '80s, Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" in the '70s.. awesome recording, even by todays standards, which are only slightly higher--mostly *cheaper* so that one could record "Dark Side of the Moon" on a budget now, if one had the talent, which most do not.]
-
Oh, I misread Jaksn's post, I thought he said "Some winners," and was trying to give an example of diverse and good music since the 80's. But, anyway, it's a decent sample of a certain kind of music since the 80's that's had popularity with some of "the masses." So I'll leave what I wrote. : )
-
Harry Binswanger of HBL noted that pop music died sometime in the 1980s.
I would very much like to read the article in which he says this. Does anyone have it, or at least a reference to where/when it appears?
Not knowing the specific context in which he made this comment, I always thought pop music--as a flourishing "genre" had died some time in the early 60's. But I certainly agree that pop, inasmuch as it did exist in the 80's, was at least several thousand times better than it has been since then.
Whereas it may be true that the lyrical content of current popular music has sunk, and even that I would not call dead, nor even still sinking, the musical composition is not lacking.I disagree that music had less variety then. The 80's music that they play now on top 40 "best of the 80's" collections is a different story--that doesn't represent even a fraction of what was out there. And if you compare to similar best of the 90's collections, I think you will see that there was just as much if not more unoriginality and lack of diversity in that decade. And none of the groups you mentioned, besides maybe the Smashing Pumpkins would be on it. And if a similar compilation were made for the 2000's so far, I don't think anyone you mentioned but maybe Avril Lavigne would be on it. I like Smashing Pumpkins and all, but do you really think their compositions are better than, say, Madonna (in the 80s)? If anything, they might have employed some more interesting recording techniques sometimes, but that's studio not composition (and is debatable)--plus, technology has been advancing even though art has been declining, so new artists do have a slight advantage over old ones in that regard.
-
Ha--I saw this the other day, and it reminds me of your picture! The kitten is very similar, plus it says "camouflage," and your girl is wearing a camouflage shirt. I like cats, btw. Yours is very cute. One thing I notice when I look at your picture is that her right hand looks small. Is that because it's not finished yet? The color on her legs looks really good.
-
Why did Francisco D'Anconia buy the San Sebastian mines and want it to fail?
How should we know.. who is John Galt?
-
I think Kate Bush
I think you've got pretty good taste in pop music! ; )
Ha, yeah that one's cool. I think my favorites (musically, I mean--their lyrics are usually pretty lame so I don't pay attention to them) are "Everything Counts" and "A Question of Lust." They have some other good ones but I can't think of them right now.Is "Just can't get enough" an example? I love that song, it is very happy and the the synthesizer just makes it unique.I don't know the songs you mentioned so I can't make any judgement if our judgement of what is "melancholic" is the same or not in other songs as well.There's not a video for "It'll End in Tears," but here's the main single from that album: Song to the Siren. It's a little melancholic, but I'd say wistful is a better description of this particular song. This Mortal Coil was actually a collaboration of different bands from the 4ad label, and this track is actually performed by (members of) another band called Cocteau Twins (my favorite pop group). It's a Tim Buckley cover (the concept of This Mortal Coil was primarily to redo songs that 4ad owner Ivo Watts-Russell liked).
The "Nocturnes" were a series of pieces that Chopin composed that were intended to be performed at night (hence the name). There are much better "Nocturnes" and better performances than this, but it was about the only one I could find with a quick search on Youtube that wasn't a student recital, and didn't cut off in the middle:
Here's Morrissey:
Girlfriend in a Coma (The Smiths)
Seasick Yet Still Docked (Morrissey) (This is his most "melancholy" song, as far as I know, at least, in the context of the way it sounds).
Interlude (duet with Siouxsie Sioux)
Hm, I guess.. To a certain extent, whether this music is melancholic or not depends on if you're in a melancholic mood or not, to begin with. Maybe "melancholic" music just means that you can listen to it when you feel melancholy, and it will not clash with your mood. If that's what it means, then I guess most of those songs are melancholic. But if it means that it makes you feel melancholy when you're in an otherwise good mood, then I think I'd disagree with some of the songs, and agree with others. As to my song, it doesn't make me melancholy when I'm in a good mood, and I don't know if it would clash when I'm already melancholic, because it puts me in a good mood even if I know I'm about to hear it--but maybe just 'cause it's my song. : )
-
Next time you watch the film, sit though the credits because the recording is wonderful and full of life - and yet that is the sort of music that was listened to by the everyday man on the street in, of all places, a hell hole such as Nazi Germany.
Yes, I always sit through the credits so I can hear the song!
In The Ominous Parallels, Dr. Peikoff says that they used to have a string quartet play selections from The Merry Widow, as they marched people off to be executed in the concentration camps. That is a hundred times more disturbing for me, because of the gruesome juxtaposition.
-
It refers to the melody. By strange I mean something like a combination "mysterious" (for example. mysterious melodies sound like "You are my destiny" by Paul Anka or "The pink Panther"), and a bit melancholic. I think I can best describe it as something of Depeche mode. Some of their melodies are also strange like "Enjoy the silence" or "Shake the disease".
Thank you for mentioning "You are my Destiny," by Paul Anka! Actually, I had never heard this track before (and I wasn't familiar with Paul Anka, either), but since you mentioned it, I looked it up. I like it a lot, and I do think it has something(s) important in common with "Otto," although I'm not sure I know what it is any better than you do, yet.
I agree with you about my melodies being mysterious, but for some reason, they don't strike me as melancholic. I think they're laid back, but ultimately optimistic (I think I need to fix something in my voice leading or counterpoint on some level to better achieve that in this song--but I'm not exactly sure what yet). But then, a lot of music that people think is melancholic doesn't sound that way to me. I had the hardest time seeing why "even" Morrissey is considered depressing music by most people. I always thought he and the Smiths were happy and perky sounding, though his lyrics seem very Shavian and sometimes either cynical or tongue-in-cheek, neither of which elements appeal to me much. But then sometimes his lyrics are fresh or even poignant, and sometimes even uplifting (not unlike Nietzsche or Shaw, sometimes), and that has been an inspiration for me lately. But I don't know why I'm ranting about the Smiths..
Lots of other music that people consider melancholic.. such as Chopin's "Nocturnes," etc, doesn't seem that way to me. If I wanted to name something I think is melancholic--I think I'd pick something more like "It'll End in Tears" by This Mortal Coil (the song and even that whole album, for the most part). That's also a perfect integration of lyrics and music, for the most part. But melancholic is not really what I'm trying to go for now. Because I'm happy now, and I want to make happy music, and ultimately try to take people totally out of the modern music scene and into something else altogether. I haven't come very close to actualizing that yet.. but I'm working on it.
I've always loved "The Pink Panther" theme. Bacharach is an influence for me (meaning there are techniques he employs that I admire, and enjoy listening to, and try to figure out how to do myself), and that's one of my top favorite songs by him. (I used to randomly put Pink Panther stickers on envelopes I would mail to people). I wonder what made you think of that song, from hearing "Otto"! "Pink Panther" is so chromatic and jazzy. I'm glad if you can see a connection though; I'll have to look for one next time I play or listen to Otto. : )
Depeche Mode, I either love or hate, depending on the song and my mood. "Enjoy the Silence" is one that I usually like a lot, but I'm not sure if I'm familiar with the other one you mentioned (I'll look it up). One thing Depeche Mode proved, that is meaningful to me, is that you can have an extremely exciting and commercially popular musical performance with just synthesizers and drum machines and singing, and no obnoxious drummers clanging on cymbals, hurting everyone's ears.
I started out as a drummer--I played drums all through high school. Went to state marching band contest, took private lessons with an amazing jazz drummer (named Joe Raynor--he came in second place out of 40,000 contestants in a national Gene Krupa drumming competition in 1941, and he had all kinds of interesting insights on rhythm, music, dynamics, and "lost arts," as he used to refer to some of the techniques he taught me), etc. But since about the year 2000, I haven't been able to stand playing live drums, and have preferred using drum machines or looped samples. I'm considering hiring a drummer for my live shows with this project, but.. Well, I know I don't have to--and if you don't believe me I can just say, "Well, Depeche Mode did it!" : P
-
Wow, this one is looking really good! Is there a symbolic significance to the number 23?
-
Did you (or anyone) notice any digs in the cartoons you linked to?
OH, there is one I that struck me that I forgot to mention! In the Phillips Light Bulb commercial-- the scientist who notices that the sun is not normal, and promptly rushes to his observatory to check his books and look through his telescope, and sees that it is not, in fact, the sun, but a Phillips bulb.. before he notices the sky at first.. is whistling "Yankee Doodle Dandy"!! How could that have possibly gotten past the censors??
-
there are various laws in a society.
if there is a law which stipulates eveyone as a child has the obligation to accept the education so his /her parents should and have to sent him/her to school, what would you think about it.
This law would be a violation of the rights of the parents.
-
This one is very strange and surreal - it is like watching a condensation of a series of horror films. But it is VERY well done and certainly gets one's attention. I'll bet it sold lots of bottles of medicine.
Have you come across anyplace that might indicate what year this one was from?
-
Lastly, government companies are an easy way to give people things they couldn't afford from the private sector.
Would you consider armed robbery to be an "easy" way for people to get things they couldn't afford from the private sector?
For instance, public schools give people an opportunity to educate their children even when they couldn't afford a private school. Thus it is easy to see why people would want the government to enter the market in many places.The average tax payer pays more in taxes every year than it would cost to send a child through a reasonably priced private school, whether they have children in school or not. Besides this, the progressive public school system is designed to cripple and indoctrinate the developing minds of children; hardly to "educate" them.
(In many cases, except where there are still remnants of a classical approach to education, which are not necessarily the best possible approach either).
-
in others the government entering a market with virtually no competitors. (schools)
This is not true at all, in the case of schools. Actually, I did a research project on this in high school. The public school system is a fairly recent development in this country (I can't remember the exact dates, but I'm thinking late 1800's), and was one of the most radical endeavors attempted by the government up to that time. Private education had been widespread. In order to achieve a monopoly, and force out the competition of private schools, the government utilized many underhanded and despicable tactics. The government schools were inefficient and low quality from the beginning. They were widely ridiculed by intellectuals at the time (such as Mark Twain). But, gradually, they won out, became accepted, and it was eventually forgotten that there ever had been or even could be an alternative. Similar to the nationalization of the railroads-- and every other socialist endeavor that I happen to know much about in America.
(I know I haven't argued or proved these assertions here, or cited my sources, but it's information that's pretty easily available. If someone wants to challenge me on any of it, I can look it up. Unfortunately, I don't have any surviving copies of that research project from high school anymore.)
-
In one version told by Andy Bernstein in his novel, Heart of a Pagan, the forward thinking Daedalus fastens the wings with bronze instead of wax.
I should clarify that this is actually a story told by one of the characters in his novel, not part of the actual plot of the novel (which is kind of a coming of age story involving college basketball). It's an enjoyable story, but I didn't want anyone to go out and buy it thinking it's about Greek mythology, specifically, and be disappointed.
-
Heard your song, here is what I think (in the order that I thought as I was listening):
[*]The sound quality of the recording was kinda bad. Too bad.
I agree. This was a very lo-fi attempt, at my friend's house, not in a studio-- recorded in a single evening. In addition, you might be listening to it on computer speakers, which are notoriously low quality, making my low quality recording sound even worse. It's kind of like if you had to do one of your paintings in crayon, and I were looking at it on an early color 8-bit monitor. If you haven't tried it with headphones, that might make it a little better. : P Otherwise, you'll have to wait for me to make a better recording or come see me when I start playing shows.. I know, it's kind of a long "drive."
[*]I liked the melody and the beat (not crazy about it but it's nice). It sounds strange, though it's difficult for me to point at the reason.Does "it" refer to the melody, or the beat? Or something else? Can you think of some other music that is "strange" in a similar way, to give me some way to evaluate that term? If it's the beat, it's probably because the recording of the drum machine came out really bad..
One person thought he heard record scratches.. lol, but I think that's just the hi-hats, that got a little distorted. [*]Parts of the song (the chorus I think) Reminded me a lot of a song by REM, but I don't know the name of it. It goes something like "smiling happy people holding hands..." but the part of their song that resembles yours is not the chorus it's the one when they sing "meet me in the crowd... something something " .lol, Funny.. Someone else said it reminded them of a Tears for Fears song called "Mad World." I haven't listened much to REM or Tears for Fears, but I know writing modal songs with four major chords in a row (I have four major chords in a row in the verse, and four in the chorus, then a it goes back and forth between two major chords, and ends off with three major chords; then the whole thing repeats) was a big thing in New Wave, and so a lot of those 80's bands wrote songs with similar chord progressions. This is kind of an experiment for me, because most of my other songs stick more or less to one key. I think there's something catchy and fresh about it, though.
[*]I liked your voice. The sound quality was bad so I couldn't tell for sure, but your voice transmits a strong atmosphere. Good singers have that ability - to transmit emotions through their voice. So
Thanks, I really appreciate that. The voice is probably the most intimate instrument, being a direct product of my body-- so even if that were the best feature in my music, I would probably be most self-conscious about it. There are two vocal tracks on that version of the song, and they were both first takes. I think I could have gotten better vocal tracks if I'd had more time, but those came out pretty good. Some people say they have trouble understanding my lyrics.. If so, there is actually a link to the lyrics, in the box that plays the song, under the controls, and to the right of the picture of Gretta Garbo, next to something like "download," "rate," and "add."
-
Several years ago when no competitors existed, it may not have been quite so obvious to some that these government businesses shouldnt exist, but whats their excuse now?
What makes you think there was a time when no competitors existed?
-
I mean compare Starship Troopers the book with Starship Troopers the movie. They managed to twist the political message into almost the complete opposite. Oh, and it was really dumb, too.
I would be very interested to find out how the Starship Troopers movie affected sales of the Starship Troopers book. Does anyone know how to find that out? I googled for a while and couldn't come up with anything. But I did find legions of sci-fi fans saying things like, "if you want to start a fight at a sci-fi convention, say, 'I liked the movie adaptation of Starship Troopers.'"
-
Keep in mind that Robin Hood was mentioned in AS as an evil mythical character.
But in a certain sense, Ragnar Danneskjöld was an adaptation (i.e., an inversion) of the Robin Hood myth. I've seen Objectivist artists do the same thing with the myth of Icarus-- everything's the same, except Icarus doesn't fall. In one version told by Andy Bernstein in his novel, Heart of a Pagan, the forward thinking Daedalus fastens the wings with bronze instead of wax. That way, the story becomes beautiful and inspiring (like the original myth was up until the tragic finale), and ends with a theme that is opposite of the original one.
-
The historical evidence that there ever was such a Jesus-persona is quite thin. Rather than invent a single person who supposedly existed, we could as easily assume that this is a fictitious character invented by a messianic Jewish cult of that era.
If we did assume that he was a mythical or fictitious character, would it really change anything, though? It seems to me that the actual "story" and events in the life of Jesus are of minor or secondary importance to the teachings of Jesus, such as "The Sermon on the Mount." Who do we ascribe these teachings to, if not to "Jesus"? Someone had to have originated those things.
But I don't mind assuming that Jesus' early followers exaggerated (or possibly originated) any claims to deity that Jesus might have made. It seems clear to me, from reading the New Testament, that Paul took this idea much further than the authors of the Gospels. My understanding is that the claim to deity was almost a cliche among Mystery Religions at the time, and that the Roman authorities didn't mind, as long as you were willing to acknowledge Caesar as the principal god, which was more a political gesture than a religious one. The exclusivity claimed by Christianity was one of the aspects that made it unique among Mystery Cults, and I've heard it conjectured that that might have been one of the tactical factors that led to its success and eventual dominance. People thought, if they're so sure they're right that they won't take a chance with any other religion (because many people belonged to multiple cults at once, so as not to put all their eggs in a basket), then maybe there was something to it.
-
I stumbled across this 3 minute video on youtube.
Can someone verify what it says? I'd like to know this for sure.
I'm not sure if each of the specific claims made in that video are true or not (several of them I've heard before), but I do know that there are many myths in many different cultures prior to Christianity that share many resemblances with the Christian mythology. In fact, the entire philosophy of early Christianity was in almost every conceivable way identical to countless other popular cults at the time in Rome, and previously in Greece, referred to as the "Mystery Religions." Informed Christians make no denial about this, but for some reason*, it just doesn't bother them.
*not literally.
Thang is, when Constantine the great wanted to unify the two opposing parties, (pagans and early christians) he knew the pagans weren't going to follow some prophet (thats all jesus was at the time) so what he did was make jesus a deity and add in many pagan stories and elements. Such as resurection and the halos around anybody holy, which is a sun-god thing.The davinci code's saying that it is based on 100% facts is surprisingly close (almost everything but the priarie of scion which was a spectaclular hoax) 70% is a better estimate.
Well, of course, Jesus wasn't actually a prophet. But in fact, his followers considered him to be more than that from the beginning. His earliest disciples thought that he was the Messiah, who was supposed to be a political liberator of the Jews, foretold in prophecy-- in addition to being a prophet. The Apostle Paul is usually credited with being the first to deify Jesus, and, heavily influenced by the Mystery Cults, elevating Jesus' status from liberator and prophet to full-on God.
By the time of Constantine, Christianity had already achieved a high status among the various Mystery Cults in Rome. Constantine just made it official. But, I haven't read The Da Vinci Code-- maybe you learned something in that that I don't know.
watch this movie for the full story. It's about how jesus wasn't even a real person, let alone the son of god.I haven't seen this particular movie, but I've seen claims like this about Jesus before. I've also seen claims that Socrates wasn't a real person, but was invented by Plato. I think it's kind of silly.
If Jesus wasn't real, then it was someone else who lived at the same time and taught the same things. Might as well just assume he was a real person. And Socrates, too. What difference does it make whether it was a guy named Jesus or a guy named Bill Smith, if the resulting philosophy and historical impact is the same?
-
It is obvious that Obvjectivism is opposed to religion or anything alluding to spirituality, which I entirely support, as they are indeed based on irrational premises.
What is your opinion on Mythology and folk tales however? Do do believe myths reflect primitive superstitions, or do you respect them on some level? Bear in mind that myths can represent human creativity, and are designed to convey a message or advice.
My respect for and opinion of certain Mythology is very high. My favorites are the Greek and Norse myths. I might remind you of the name of Ayn Rand's most famous novel, Atlas Shrugged (in which she does make explicit reference to the myths of Atlas, Prometheus, Atlantis, and even Robin Hood-- just to name several off the top of my head).
Thoughts On: "The Death Of Pop Music"
in The Objectivism Meta-Blog Discussion
Posted
lol.. Thanks for the response. I actually am well acquainted with the Smashing Pumpkins--and I'm a fan. But it's not necessarily always their songwriting that I like about them (sometimes it's good).
I disagree. In fact, I think some of their most boring compositions are on Adore (not counting Machina, which I'm not as much familiar with as the other ones, so I can't say for sure). But, somewhat case in point, I think some of their best recording techniques are on Adore, which makes it one of their best overall records.Yes, I have. I agree that it is a beautiful song. But, it is primarily so (IMO), because of the great sound effects and tones on it. If you took all of that away, it would be a boring folk song. The songwriting, qua composition, on that song is pathetic next to a Madonna song such as "Oh Father"-- if you haven't heard that one, I suggest that you look it up. I couldn't find a video for it on Youtube, but that might be because of copywright issues or something.
This comment especially makes me think that you might actually like Smashing Pumkins because of their recording techniques, tones, and sound effects, and not even realize it. Landslide says nothing about Billy Corgan's composing/songwriting ability. He didn't write this song!But I've already digested it, before I made the comment, and I disagree. It's not that I don't like Billy Corgan, it's just I don't think he ever wrote something approaching "Oh Father" or even "Material Girl" for that matter. His songs aren't usually very interesting melodically. They just have gimmick guitar tones and arrangements (which he achieved usually from trying to copy My Bloody Valentine and/or early 20th century music--as in "Tonight, Tonight" and others) that make them interesting.
I didn't necessarily mean "Madonna," the individual woman, but Madonna as the entity who created the songs that Madonna performed. Prince would have probably been just as good an example, though.Pumpkins are absolutely no different in this respect whatsoever. In fact, it's only their Grunge "image" that would ever make someone say something like this.
Corgan is actually friends with Marilyn Manson.. They're at least as much the same as Manson is to Madonna.I have no idea which songs Madonna actually composed--I meant the songs that were composed specifically for her.
I've only heard a few songs off this album, but I think they're amazing. I hadn't heard that it "flopped." Sorry to hear that. : ( But it only came out a year ago, maybe sales will pick up.I think this is hairsplitting. Rock is a form of pop!
Easy. Just compare their song writing. What's unfair about that? They're all using the same 12 notes.Nope, I'm familiar with the whole catalog (except Machina). It's not obvious to me--I think whoever wrote Madonna's songs is a better song writer. Her songs are in general catchier, more melodic, and I might even argue that they cover a broader spectrum of emotional content than SP. SP is a great band, and they're all fantastic musicians IMO (at least, when D'arcy was on bass). And Billy Corgan is a really good songwriter. But I think there are tons of bands in the 80's and even more frequently in earlier decades who were much better.
Yeah, I love The Cure too, and "Just Like Heaven" is one of my favorites. I think they wrote much better songs than Smashing Pumpkins, just like Madonna. I'm not sure about who was better between Madonna and The Cure. But it seems clear to me if you take Madonna and The Cure vs Smashing Pumpkins and Nirvana, then the 80's win. : )I like Japanese pop, too! Do you have any favorite recommendations?