N
nomadologist
Guest
That almost sounds Deleuzian...
Rock 'n' roll: more harm than good?
- Thread starter swears
- Start date
That almost sounds Deleuzian...
Rupture and violence now? This suggestion is nothing new, in fact it is by now a cliche that has been uttered and critiqued repeatedly and incessantly since it became fashionable, whether for you that 'when it became fashionable' was ancient Greece or the end of the 18th century or the end of the 19th or 1968 or now (you get the point; one's choice will depend on your particular frame of reference and/or expertise). To take by merely one recent example, Derrida was hammered for the apocalyptic language that he used in the late 60s and himself renounced it (aspects of it, anyway). It's as if every young twentysomething wants to re-invent the wheel by shouting "rupture now, we need it!" before actually doing their homework to find out that this is one of the oldest calls in western thought. If someone really wants change, I would humbly suggest familiarizing oneself with some of the details of your own tradition before calling for something that is as common as dirt. Rupture and violence? Is there is anything more familiar in the humanities right now than rupture-oriented and rupture-affirming thought? It's everywhere!
As for the distinction between art and entertainment, I would be very curious, rather than blithe assertions about the current situation, to hear your analysis of this 'distinction' in historical terms, and how we got to the position that you claim we are in today. Say, what the two words 'art' and 'entertainment' mean to you in the context of European history, either Greek or Roman or medieval or early modern or? How about in the centuries from the renaissance to the industrial revolution, down to present times?
And why on earth do people insist on capitalizing words like 'art' and 'capitalism'? By any standards (other than, say, music bloggers), it strikes me as quite odd.
Last edited:
N
nomadologist
Guest
in self-defense: tate i capitalize all sorts of wrong shit because i am called upon to type so much i am literally instructed by doctors not to be too anal about typing or else i won't have my wrists for playing music
and on top of that i don't give a shit
and on top of that i don't give a shit
Rupture & Violence aka Shock & Awe: see Bertolucci's The Dreamers. There he paints that violent revolutionary spirit as just another form of fascism and more importantly, narcissism.
I'm not sure there is a problem in this regard. The social trajectory has been heading where its needed to go (values challenged by rock, pomo, etc), and is coming to another place.
Persistent sustainability is one of the new values, rather than violent change.
I'm not sure there is a problem in this regard. The social trajectory has been heading where its needed to go (values challenged by rock, pomo, etc), and is coming to another place.
Persistent sustainability is one of the new values, rather than violent change.
And, I would presume, Nomadologist, you have time to kill...?
Tate: (precise to the core just as I am vague/ill-informed as ever!) Correct, demand for rupture is as old as human thought, but how many genuine ruptures have there been? Was '68 a failed rupturing of the norms of society? And even if the demand for it is cliched (as, surely it must be) does that make it any less essential/desirable? Or are you basically saying "so what? --- everyone demands it, but such demands almost always amount to nothing" in which case I agree with you, its not supposed to be revelatory statement, rather an obvious one which I was making in response to Nomadologist's use of Freud (in spite of the fact she doesn't even rate Freud???). Lets save the art/entertainment thing for another thread perhaps? I'll happily cop to the fact that it is a tricky distinction to properly unravel, though if you would like to have a go at unpicking it from the renaissance to the industrial revolution to present times I'd like to read it (though presumably your whole point is that it cannot satisfactorily be achieved without basing one's argument on glib assumptions...?)
Tate: (precise to the core just as I am vague/ill-informed as ever!) Correct, demand for rupture is as old as human thought, but how many genuine ruptures have there been? Was '68 a failed rupturing of the norms of society? And even if the demand for it is cliched (as, surely it must be) does that make it any less essential/desirable? Or are you basically saying "so what? --- everyone demands it, but such demands almost always amount to nothing" in which case I agree with you, its not supposed to be revelatory statement, rather an obvious one which I was making in response to Nomadologist's use of Freud (in spite of the fact she doesn't even rate Freud???). Lets save the art/entertainment thing for another thread perhaps? I'll happily cop to the fact that it is a tricky distinction to properly unravel, though if you would like to have a go at unpicking it from the renaissance to the industrial revolution to present times I'd like to read it (though presumably your whole point is that it cannot satisfactorily be achieved without basing one's argument on glib assumptions...?)
Social trajectory heading to where it needs to go??? Would you care to elaborate that one, bleep?
Also, persistent sustainability in itself could function as a conceptual rupturing, I think! Certainly if taken seriously such an idea mounts a massive challenge to the current western physical and economic infrastructure.
N
nomadologist
Guest
don't really know where this is coming from, but...
why yes, i do. about 8 hours a day at "work", on the clock. i'm getting PAID for this, yo.
Sports figures, tabloids, movie stars, soap operas, models etc etc... modern mythical figures. Part of why we don't recognise it is that it happens in real-time; theres no distance because the artifact has become the story has become the present.
From myth to history to film to reality.
Touching on the ideas from the start of the thread really... society had to face gender issues and become more sexually open. Theres still a balance we're finding, but things improved. One step at a time...
On a wee Proud Kiwi tangent; NZ was the first country to give women the vote, and the first country with a (ex-sex worker) transsexual Mayor/MP, Georgina Beyer; a truly inspirational woman. Its a funny country but in some respects its a little firecracker! Probably because theres people who really push against the ingrained frontier mentality.
Why did it HAVE to though?
Balance; its like a pendulum. If we go too far in one direction, we swing back the other, or at least there has to be an opposing force that creates an equilibrium.
50s conformity vs rebellion.
60s conservatism vs hippies.
Victorian gender morality vs 20th century.
Paganism vs Christianity.
Feminine vs Masculine.
Last edited:
the undisputed truth
Banned
i'd put it down to polynesian traditions of matriarchy and our liberal attitudes towards sex not to mention our mongrel bloodlines...
...but I would say that wouldn't I ???
BTW did you know in polynesian languages there is no word to distinguish art from culture ???
yes, you would... but thats definately one of the frictions at work in NZ.i'd put it down to polynesian traditions of matriarchy and our liberal attitudes towards sex not to mention our mongrel bloodlines...
...but I would say that wouldn't I ???
BTW did you know in polynesian languages there is no word to distinguish art from culture ???
Didn't know that about poly art-culture. interesting.
The japanese don't differentiate between blue and green. Different shades of the same colour...
Must dash! pip pip old bean.
swears
preppy-kei
So green is just a yellower shade of blue?
O
Omaar
Guest
How is that surprising? Why would be there be a differentiation?
the undisputed truth
Banned
^^^because in western traditions there is a differentiation. Western culture/art being the yardstick by which all others are measured in terms of aesthetics and values...
...it sux but thats how it is
...it sux but thats how it is
that was what i had heard, digging a bit they use ‘aoi’ to describe the colour of natural things (plants, sea, sky, etc) which can range in colour from green to blue to grey.
or from wikipedia: Japanese also has two terms that refer specifically to the color green, 綠 (midori) and グリーン (guriin, from the English word). However, in Japan, although the traffic lights have the same colored lights that other countries have, the green light is called using the same word for blue, "aoi", because green is considered a shade of blue.
bruno
est malade
links, please
ford.anglia
Member
i don't know what all the hostility is for I'd say the advent of rock n roll could very likely have been a black day for (western) artistic creativity.
This idea that progressive developments in politics etc are in any way linked to rock n roll is dubious to say the least.
Modern classical music, modern jazz, other black music etc were progressing completely independently from rock music and were undeniably linked with figures involved in progressive thought.
Many of the developments which have been used as evidence by apologists for rock eg civil rights, sexual liberation, legal system changes were all well underway by the mid-fifties and even if we're talking of late 60s when rock was supposed to be at its most powerful the vast majority of changes (especially when it comes to getting them on the statute books) were led by figures who were in no way part of any rock n roll generation.
That's not to say I don't appreciate the occasional rock track usually from the period when it was actually relevant (1965-72?) just think what really interesting other alternative scenarios were we denied by the monster that rock n roll became...
This idea that progressive developments in politics etc are in any way linked to rock n roll is dubious to say the least.
Modern classical music, modern jazz, other black music etc were progressing completely independently from rock music and were undeniably linked with figures involved in progressive thought.
Many of the developments which have been used as evidence by apologists for rock eg civil rights, sexual liberation, legal system changes were all well underway by the mid-fifties and even if we're talking of late 60s when rock was supposed to be at its most powerful the vast majority of changes (especially when it comes to getting them on the statute books) were led by figures who were in no way part of any rock n roll generation.
That's not to say I don't appreciate the occasional rock track usually from the period when it was actually relevant (1965-72?) just think what really interesting other alternative scenarios were we denied by the monster that rock n roll became...