Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

eyeless

Regulars
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Country
    Not Specified
  • Real Name
    Jerry Nilson
  • Occupation
    Data/IT

eyeless's Achievements

Novice

Novice (2/7)

0

Reputation

  1. Yeah -- some people are even that stupid that they get worked up about philosophy, you know! (Sarcasm intended.) But, I agree with you, that it is wonderful that people can find so much interesting things to talk about even in regard to such an obscure topic! (Sarcasm intended. I have to write it as I am not sure you would get this otherwise... .) Jerry
  2. I could possibly have misunderstood his position and therefore do not want leave out his name. One point is that I think it may be easier than in most fields to make errors regarding art and esp. music, since it is more difficult to point out contradictions in evaluations and propositions in that field. Another was that, while you may dislike some art for having a sense-of-life contrary to your own, this does not make it wrong for another objective person to enjoy that art nor is it that this art is no good for that reason. Art fulfills a spiritual need for man no matter whether that man is partly a man on bad premises or not. Jerry
  3. I have seen some people package-dealing, lumping statements about tribal music and folk music together in this thread, and I wish to point out that I do not believe Ayn Rand wanted to do so herself. There may be elements of tribalism in folk music (and folk art), but it would probably vary between different folk musics. I have also heard Leonard Peikoff warn about folk music, but he never made it clear why he did so (one of the extremely few puzzling things I have heard from him, but he may have relied on Rand's statements, but nothing suggested it). (Just as I read a prominent Objectivist comment on how he overcame Beethoven, which made no sense at all to me ... . If Beethoven is expressing something malevolent and one likes it -- I guess it is ones malevolence rather than Beethoven's music one needs to overcome ... .) As usual Ayn Rand is best taken exactly on her words! She writes about philosophy in principles and not by pointing to only to concretes around her. When she condemns "minimalist musics" for example -- what she condemns is the essential of this music -- its repetitiveness. She is not condemning the possible expressiveness of that music. That music is reducing art to the minimal in principle, but may not do so in every instance. A good example in my view is the extremely different experiences it is to listen to different works by Steve Reich (the arch popular minimalist) -- some of his works simply stupefies you and achieves nothing, while some other may be very expressive. (His 'Drumming' might be an example of the first and his 'Music for 18 musicians' might be a good example of the latter. (I do believe this is very personal and Ayn Rand might not have agreed with this example at all, of course.)) Folk Music is essentially what Rand says it is -- a part of a ritual for concrete bound people. However, all music that draws from such sources may not be essentially about this. Jerry
  4. I meant to say "need of art" (I am not sure which way would be the shortest and best way to say it in english, but just to clear up a possible misunderstanding). Jerry
  5. A long time ago in this thread (just started reading it): A malevolence sense-of-life is no good. But, there is much in the world today that makes it easy to have a malevolent outlook now and then. Ideally the bad things in life and this world will likely diminish in stature to you as you grow in your understanding of Objectivism, yourself and the world, but now and then things happen that temporarily will make you somewhat malevolent in mind and then you might find that more malevolent music is better suited to fullfil your temporary artistic needs. I think it is very dangerous to suggest that one day you should not want to listen to this or that -- that is just precisely what is creating the response by certain newcomers to Objectivism that Stephen himself laments (that some think listening to this or that is shameful). It is also sometimes VERY difficult to identify what "idealogical" response a certain music will provoke. You should try as Stephen says, but never listen to anybody elses opinion on the specific matter, please (or not too much anyway)! If Objectivists cannot agree on the theme and value of films (which are much more explicit), then certainly they are not to agree on whether Beethoven or Liszt are basically having a good sense-of-life or not (not to deny that such agreement is possible in specific cases and even in general). Jerry
  6. There is a half-famous pop band from Ireland that is called The Fountainhead and who has released an album called 'The Voice of Reason' (I think it was called so) (maybe it was released also in Washington ...?). They were on the same label as the more known China Crises and maybe U2 at one point (I first heard about them through and Objectivist who liked them (I don't)). I guess it is difficult to protect oneself against young people taking names in this fashion without much thought. In a sense it is a good sign so many unthinking people just cannot come up with anything else -- a sign of the impact Ayn Rand is having around the world. Jerry
×
×
  • Create New...