quietcity Posted March 18, 2014 Share Posted March 18, 2014 Stu, you sound as if you expect "art" to progress only in one specific direction, in a way marked by moderation and self-restraint. I hope you can see the inherent contradiction in this idea. The moment you put limits on art, it stops being art. If we want new and edifying art is to emerge, we have to tolerate all the silliness, fluff, excess and offensiveness that comes along with it. Art is not an efficient process. But that which is truly of value will endure, and that which is empty will fade. When I first learned of Andy Warhol a long time ago, I thought he was a semi-charlatan. Now I consider him a genius, albeit of the sui generis type. There are plenty of other artists or musicians that in my youth, I thought were amazing, but now I barely remember. So just be patient, for goodness sake. It is not for you to determine what is or is not art. That is posterity's job. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsubone Posted March 18, 2014 Share Posted March 18, 2014 (edited) Correct; the allowance for anything goes is a bad thing. It never, never, never leads to love, peace, harmony, respect, but always leads to hedonism, narcissism, self-indulgence; always. Um, what? What about the hedonism of the 1920s leading to the austerity and great social advances of the next period of history? The Greatest Generation came from that hedonistic decade and the austere one that followed. But thanks for painting everything with a broad brush. And does not Lent follow Fat Tuesday? A day of Hedonism followed by 40 days of self-discovery, conservation, and self-improvement. Sounds like a good thing coming from a day of anything goes. Edited March 18, 2014 by fsubone 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 18, 2014 Author Share Posted March 18, 2014 Seems to me Gaga is railing against the debauchery... Noting that she's won Grammy awards, toured the world multiple times, and succeeded in making albums that represent her own true sensibilities, she told Norris that her corporate handlers still valued her looks over her accomplishments. "We just want you to look beautiful," she said, echoing what she had been told. "Is it all back to t### and a##?" Gaga wondered. "That's so sad." source So it's the corporate bureaucrats and accountants who are pushing the debauchery???? Hmmmm.... So, as a response to being told that she should just look beautiful by the 'depraved corporate handlers' she performed one of the most magnificent piano concertos ever written to shut them up, which she has the talent to accomplish. Nope; she asks someone to exhibit true virtue by vomiting on her in a public performance. Interesting concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 18, 2014 Author Share Posted March 18, 2014 Um, what? What about the hedonism of the 1920s leading to the austerity and great social advances of the next period of history? The Greatest Generation came from that hedonistic decade and the austere one that followed. But thanks for painting everything with a broad brush. And does not Lent follow Fat Tuesday? A day of Hedonism followed by 40 days of self-discovery, conservation, and self-improvement. Sounds like a good thing coming from a day of anything goes. a) It was the economic collapse of the 1930's that caused many to buckle down, exhibit the behavior of respecting and helping one another, and generated the love and compassion which brought us out of despair and into the great advances of the next period of history. b) Fat Tuesday was intended to be a day of preparation for Lent as opposed to a day of hedonism prior to entering the period of Lent. And the construct of diving into extreme self-indulgence debauchery hedonism just before repenting actually goes against the holy passages warning against such behavior and thus is an actual corruption of the real intent of Fat Tuesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsubone Posted March 18, 2014 Share Posted March 18, 2014 a) It was the economic collapse of the 1930's that caused many to buckle down, exhibit the behavior of respecting and helping one another, and generated the love and compassion which brought us out of despair and into the great advances of the next period of history. Yes, but the anything goes and buy-now attitude of the 20s was a large contributing factor to the collapse of 1929. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsubone Posted March 18, 2014 Share Posted March 18, 2014 b) Fat Tuesday was intended to be a day of preparation for Lent as opposed to a day of hedonism prior to entering the period of Lent. And the construct of diving into extreme self-indulgence debauchery hedonism just before repenting actually goes against the holy passages warning against such behavior and thus is an actual corruption of the real intent of Fat Tuesday. And did I miss a memo where debauchery is now the word to use? It might not be the actually definition, but it is what it is. A day of hedonism followed by a period of repentance and self-improvement. At least people take the time to improve their lives, which is important. I'm sorry you don't like what the day is, but the period that follows should be something to appreciate. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 18, 2014 Author Share Posted March 18, 2014 Stu, you sound as if you expect "art" to progress only in one specific direction, in a way marked by moderation and self-restraint. I hope you can see the inherent contradiction in this idea. The moment you put limits on art, it stops being art. If we want new and edifying art is to emerge, we have to tolerate all the silliness, fluff, excess and offensiveness that comes along with it. Art is not an efficient process. But that which is truly of value will endure, and that which is empty will fade. When I first learned of Andy Warhol a long time ago, I thought he was a semi-charlatan. Now I consider him a genius, albeit of the sui generis type. There are plenty of other artists or musicians that in my youth, I thought were amazing, but now I barely remember. So just be patient, for goodness sake. It is not for you to determine what is or is not art. That is posterity's job. Thanks for being lucid in your presentation!!! I have no expectation that art go in one direction; I accept that it will be fragmented in multiple directions. But I respectfully disagree on the limits aspect because we all place a limit at some point; some place it farther out than others, but even the most ardent advocate of ‘anything goes’ will not actually live by that standard because even they will set a limit somewhere on that line. My concern here is the genera of DCI, WGI, and BOA, and other marching arts because many instructors and designers consume, defend, and promote behaviors like what just occurred with Gaga. And with this thread I wanted to generate a discussion about my concerns to see if many on DCP would rail against me calling this stuff debauchery and depravity. Well, read through the thread to see if that occurred. As for the word ‘tolerance’, that word was never intended to be a synonym of the word ‘acceptance’. I can tolerate certain behaviors and let them manifest in a free society, but in a free society I also do not have to accept them as being righteous behaviors. While I have no desire to force my beliefs onto those in the realm of DCI, I do want to generate discussions on my objection to what type of performance art may influince the course and direction of marching arts designs in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted March 18, 2014 Share Posted March 18, 2014 (edited) Thanks for being lucid in your presentation!!! I have no expectation that art go in one direction; I accept that it will be fragmented in multiple directions. But I respectfully disagree on the limits aspect because we all place a limit at some point; some place it farther out than others, but even the most ardent advocate of ‘anything goes’ will not actually live by that standard because even they will set a limit somewhere on that line. My concern here is the genera of DCI, WGI, and BOA, and other marching arts because many instructors and designers consume, defend, and promote behaviors like what just occurred with Gaga. And with this thread I wanted to generate a discussion about my concerns to see if many on DCP would rail against me calling this stuff debauchery and depravity. Well, read through the thread to see if that occurred. As for the word ‘tolerance’, that word was never intended to be a synonym of the word ‘acceptance’. I can tolerate certain behaviors and let them manifest in a free society, but in a free society I also do not have to accept them as being righteous behaviors. While I have no desire to force my beliefs onto those in the realm of DCI, I do want to generate discussions on my objection to what type of performance art may influince the course and direction of marching arts designs in the future. Last thing I want to do is engage in this conversation BUT there are a few who are contributing which I have gown to respect their views, maybe because they are sim. to my thoughts not that they need to be OR that they made me think or consider another direction , anyway what or who makes you think anything in WGI or DCI ..BOAis going into the extreme direction you are talking about AND I guess you are appointing yourself the moral police on the subject which is fine FOR YOU and may or MAY NOT be the opinions of the rest of the activity...............................now dont write back and put words in my mouth..which we all know you love to do...dont read more into what I just said other than exactly what I wrote Edited March 18, 2014 by GUARDLING Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 18, 2014 Author Share Posted March 18, 2014 Yes, but the anything goes and buy-now attitude of the 20s was a large contributing factor to the collapse of 1929. All that shows is that hedonism leads to collapse; it is erroneous to imply that the hedonism which results in the collapse is righteous behavior like the behavior which is exhibited after the collapse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 18, 2014 Author Share Posted March 18, 2014 Last thing I want to do is engage in this conversation BUT there are a few who are contributing which I have gown to respect their views, maybe because they are sim. to my thoughts not that they need to be OR that they made me think or consider another direction , anyway what or who makes you think anything in WGI or DCI ..BOAis going into the extreme direction you are talking about AND I guess you are appointing yourself the moral police on the subject which is fine FOR YOU and may or MAY NOT be the opinions of the rest of the activity...............................now dont write back and put words in my mouth..which we all know you love to do...dont read more into what I just said other than exactly what I wrote I have never said that I want to force my beliefs onto others; and I have not appointed myself as the police. I just want to discuss and debate artistic and cultural directions in the context that the marching arts activity may go down the road of the current cultural uplifting of performers like Gaga. Why? Because many people have posted on DCP, including this thread, defending the anything goes philosophy, and they freely admit that they consume the arts in which performers exhibit those behaviors. It appears to me that since many have defended the complete openness of unrestricted artistic presentation here on DCP, the concern I have that it will, maybe incrementally, maybe slowly, but my concern that it will influence DCI and WGI show designs in the future is a valid concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts