fsubone Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 The Supreme Court has maintained that we are a free society; that for the most part Government cannot stifle free speech; and that art, however it is presented, falls into that free speech area as long as it is only adults involved. But I have yet to read a Supreme Court decision which defines any free speech as debauchery or righteous. The Court has actually left those decisions up to, wait for it, us in society to define. By the way, you still have not defended the position that the behaviors done by the Gaga are something other than perverted depravity. All you have done is throw out some theoretical construct about the Supreme Court. Come on; defend the actions of Miley Cyrus sexually twerking with a large stuffed bear or Gaga having someone vomit on her while on stage in front of the audience as being ‘righteous’ as opposed to ‘depraved’. I'm not saying it's righteous, but it's not as black and white as you're trying to make it. You call it depraved, that doesn't make it 100% that. Like I said earlier, if people didn't agree with it, they wouldn't go to these shows and see it. But surprise, surprise, people keep showing up and throwing money at these artists. I don't have to like it, you don't have to like, but that's the way the world is structured. It's not your call to decide for others what is depraved or not, you can only decide for yourself. I still have no idea how this connects to drum corps, are you expecting a corps to work vomit into a show, or do something you find morally depraved? Or are you just looking for a soapbox to espouse your thoughts on morality? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 16, 2014 Author Share Posted March 16, 2014 At onetime selling your daughter for cattle was not degenerative. At another time gay marriage is sometimes still seen as degenerative. Because I now know that you believe in an absolute truth I'm wondering how your perspective on the absolute morality of art is defined and why that has been defined in that why. (Or how you have managed to decide was is and isn't degenerate corruption?) Because I am more on relative morals rather than absolute your concern or issue doesn't phase me. Ok, I respect your opinion; but here is a test to see if you actually believe what you just wrote: If 'society' gets to the point of accepting the organization Jeff Ream wants me to not name, will you still hold true to your moral relativity if they bring that behavior into the world of performance art? Or is there a point, which may be in a different spot than mine, but is there a point where you will stand for some sort of moral absolute in the realm of performance art? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seen-it-all Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 And my point of viewing this in the light of an activity such as DCI is that many who are involved with the creative framework of corps within DCI not only agree with but partake of the type of performance exhibited not only by Gaga but also many others in our culture who dive into that world of performance gutter behavior.. Who, exactly? Please be specific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 16, 2014 Author Share Posted March 16, 2014 I'm not saying it's righteous, but it's not as black and white as you're trying to make it. You call it depraved, that doesn't make it 100% that. Like I said earlier, if people didn't agree with it, they wouldn't go to these shows and see it. But surprise, surprise, people keep showing up and throwing money at these artists. I don't have to like it, you don't have to like, but that's the way the world is structured. It's not your call to decide for others what is depraved or not, you can only decide for yourself. Many people pay money to engage in certain behavior through the Ashly Madison website, many people pay to watch and engage in behavior via hard core porn, and in this free society they are free to do so. But that does not mean they are not engaging in debauchery; it just means they are comfortable in accepting the debauchery as perceived righteousness. I still have no idea how this connects to drum corps, are you expecting a corps to work vomit into a show, or do something you find morally depraved? Or are you just looking for a soapbox to espouse your thoughts on morality? This ties into drum corps because many have posted on DCP that they appreciate the 'performing art' exhibited by the Gaga and others like her; and they consider the progression of DCI should go in the direction of modern 'performance art'. All I am doing is pointing out the direction 'performance art' is going and that if left up to them, DCI will be going, maybe slowly, but going down the same 'performing art' path because that is what they consume outside of DCI. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 16, 2014 Author Share Posted March 16, 2014 Who, exactly? Please be specific. If you want to go back and re-read all the threads and postings where the behaviors of Gaga, Cyrus, Marylyn Manson, Madonna, as well as the historical Dada movement and Beat movement ‘performance artists’, were praised by many here on DCP please do so. There you will find the names, or screen names, of the apologists. You will also find postings by me within the context of trying to find sarcastic humor in the modern progression of ‘performance art’. But as I stated in this thread, I have now moved from sarcastic humor over to fed-up frustration, and quickly moving into what’s the use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seen-it-all Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 If you want to go back and re-read all the threads and postings where the behaviors of Gaga, Cyrus, Marylyn Manson, Madonna, as well as the historical Dada movement and Beat movement ‘performance artists’, were praised by many here on DCP please do so. There you will find the names, or screen names, of the apologists. You will also find postings by me within the context of trying to find sarcastic humor in the modern progression of ‘performance art’. But as I stated in this thread, I have now moved from sarcastic humor over to fed-up frustration, and quickly moving into what’s the use. Nice try, but that's not the information I requested. This is what you said: "And my point of viewing this in the light of an activity such as DCI is that many who are involved with the creative framework of corps within DCI not only agree with but partake of the type of performance exhibited not only by Gaga but also many others in our culture who dive into that world of performance gutter behavior." You're making a definitive statement about a very specific group of people in regards to their specific tastes and beliefs. You even go so far as to claim that because of their tastes and beliefs, "it will most certainly have an underlying effect on the future artistic direction of DCI and WGI." (your words) So if you're the one making these claims about this specific group of people (NOT EVERYDAY DCP MEMBERS, but actual DCI-affiliated instructors, designers, and/or directors), the onus is therefore on YOU to state who these people are, since you seem to imply definitive knowledge of what they believe. After all, if we're going to protect the activity from these gutter-loving creeps, we need to know their identities. So lead the way, Stu. Tell us who they are. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsubone Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Many people pay money to engage in certain behavior through the Ashly Madison website, many people pay to watch and engage in behavior via hard core porn, and in this free society they are free to do so. But that does not mean they are not engaging in debauchery; it just means they are comfortable in accepting the debauchery as perceived righteousness. Because it's not debauchery to them. It is to you. And that's it. It's your definition of debauchery. Why do you get to be the Moral Police for everyone else? If there is a demand for anything, there will always be a supply. That's free-market economics for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsubone Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 This ties into drum corps because many have posted on DCP that they appreciate the 'performing art' exhibited by the Gaga and others like her; and they consider the progression of DCI should go in the direction of modern 'performance art'. All I am doing is pointing out the direction 'performance art' is going and that if left up to them, DCI will be going, maybe slowly, but going down the same 'performing art' path because that is what they consume outside of DCI. And as I pointed out earlier, "performance art" doesn't just mean people puking on each other. DCI is a performance art, since it's music being performed in public. The CSO is performance art, Oscar winning films are performance art, it isn't just what you want for your weird argument. Again, please provide some hard evidence that DCI is going in this direction so that people will be puking on each other as a part of a show design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 16, 2014 Author Share Posted March 16, 2014 Because it's not debauchery to them. It is to you. And that's it. It's your definition of debauchery. Why do you get to be the Moral Police for everyone else? If there is a demand for anything, there will always be a supply. That's free-market economics for you. Ok, since you contend that it is relative to each person, and we should respect that as being the case, I will ask the same question to you as I did to Charlie1223: If 'society' gets to the point of accepting the organization Jeff Ream wants me to not name, will you still hold true to your moral relativity if they bring that behavior into the world of performance art? Or is there a point, which may be in a different spot than mine, but is there a point where you will stand for some sort of moral absolute in the realm of performance art? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 16, 2014 Author Share Posted March 16, 2014 Nice try, but that's not the information I requested. This is what you said: "And my point of viewing this in the light of an activity such as DCI is that many who are involved with the creative framework of corps within DCI not only agree with but partake of the type of performance exhibited not only by Gaga but also many others in our culture who dive into that world of performance gutter behavior." You're making a definitive statement about a very specific group of people in regards to their specific tastes and beliefs. You even go so far as to claim that because of their tastes and beliefs, "it will most certainly have an underlying effect on the future artistic direction of DCI and WGI." (your words) So if you're the one making these claims about this specific group of people (NOT EVERYDAY DCP MEMBERS, but actual DCI-affiliated instructors, designers, and/or directors), the onus is therefore on YOU to state who these people are, since you seem to imply definitive knowledge of what they believe. After all, if we're going to protect the activity from these gutter-loving creeps, we need to know their identities. So lead the way, Stu. Tell us who they are. a) There certainly have been designers and instructors defending both Gaga and the influence she and other performing artists should have on WGI and DCI show designs. Again you can do the back-log research of their postings on DCP and other websites if you desire; and b) while I have had direct communication from various designers and instructors on this matter it is not allowed, nor wise, to quote third-party emails or third-party discussions on DCP other than in general terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts