RoR: Forum

>>>>>It would be a shame if people judged a society by what they see in their popular art. <<<<<<

One can judge the society by what they enjoy. The truth is that many Americans do not enjoy many things in popular culture.

>>>they do like that art, or else so many outsiders wouldn't be consuming it and spending hundreds of billions of dollars on it. <<<<<<<

Maybe that's the reason they are not super-powers.

>>>>Hmmm....I'm not aware of any civilizations that ended with just dick and fart jokes in their culture.<<<<<<<

Russians have nothing left but their sense of humor. And it much more developed than American. Sorry, can not provide the examples, they are just un-translatable. You can take my word for it. ;-)

>>>Clearly by any measurable standard, things are not worse. Teen pregnancy rates are lower than in the past, drug use among teens is down, crime is down, wealth is up, food is cheaper, all you have left is the subjective nature of aesthetics to complain about. <<<

Again, I am not the part of "doom and gloom". Don't mix me with that. But the values that the certain part of popular culture promotes mix well with welfare, drugs, and crime.

Post 21

Thursday, February 25, 2010 - 8:59pm

It Happened One Night - Frank Capra - 5 Oscars

Triumph of the Will - Leni Riefenstahl - "one of the greatest films in history"

Post 22

Thursday, February 25, 2010 - 9:06pm

Maria:

Again, I am not the part of "doom and gloom". Don't mix me with that. But the values that the certain part of popular culture promotes mix well with welfare, drugs, and crime.

Well then if the art has gotten worse, and it mixes well with those things, shouldn't we see an increase in drug use and crime?

And yet, we don't.

You hypothesize that maybe these other foreign countries that consume American pop art are not superpowers because of that consumption, yet even with the rest of the world, life is much better than it ever has been by the same measurable standards of wealth. So obviously, it's not hurting them is it?
(Edited by John Armaos on 2/25, 9:14pm)

Post 23

Thursday, February 25, 2010 - 9:19pm

deleted - duplicate

(Edited by Maria Feht on 2/25, 9:30pm)

Post 24

Thursday, February 25, 2010 - 9:25pm

Deleted - duplicate
(Edited by Maria Feht on 2/25, 9:31pm)

Post 25

Thursday, February 25, 2010 - 9:27pm

>>>And yet, we don't. <<<

Because of it, or despite of it? As I said: there is an opposition to popular culture (Or should I always add: certain part of it, which is pretty big).

That's why it's hard to judge America from outside: one automatically assumes that is what Americans watch and that's what they like. In reality most people in America tell you that television is crap now days. And it is.

The life is better for most of the people because of Western technological advances. Because of this new technology fewer people are needed to keep everybody fed. Everyone else can watch TV.

Post 26

Thursday, February 25, 2010 - 9:38pm

Christ. This stinker of an article is the standard for the "good" guys on this forum? How is trashing the super bowl promoting the fine arts? What's next, bashing country music? Monty Python? Kids making fart noises with their armpits? It's just a stupid article. Sure brought out the superiority complexes on this forum however.

Post 27

Thursday, February 25, 2010 - 9:57pm

>>>What's next, bashing country music? Monty Python? Kids making fart noises with their armpits?<<<

Absolutely. That's what makes America - America.

Coming from dictatorship country one is unconsciously waiting to see the opposite - the dictatorship of GOOD, where the good rule. Instead you find un-ending family feud (with some very nasty relatives). And that's how it works.

If you like to see everybody agree - go to Germany. ;-) They always know how the things are done!

Post 28

Thursday, February 25, 2010 - 10:07pm

Mike, if you think that those who didn't like Campbell's post have superiority complexes you have your head up your ass (hope that isn't too close to a fart reference for you).

Reread my objections - I don't like it when people call others fascists and racists without justification. Should I understand that you are okay with that?

In case you didn't notice, I also don't like it when that legitimate complaint of mine gets me labeled as having a superiority complex.

Post 29

Thursday, February 25, 2010 - 10:15pm

Steve. You never pass up an opportunity to tell me I have my head up my ass. You deserve no reply from me whatever. You are the most stupid ignorant educated man I have ever come across. And that's saying something. GFY.

Post 30

Thursday, February 25, 2010 - 10:47pm

I guess I'm just lucky... getting a reply from you that I didn't deserve, even after you said I wouldn't. Don't worry Mike, you're just experiencing some unwarranted feelings of inferiority. Just do some armpit farts... It'll perk you right up :-)

Post 31

Thursday, February 25, 2010 - 11:23pm

MIke,

In Post 8, Steve asked you some legitimate questions, which deserve answers if you expect us to take seriously your sanction of Campbell's character assassination, viz.:

Mike, I have no objection to anything Laurie wrote. And I don't care that you found the article repulsive.

But as to Mr. Campbell, maybe I missed the sentences in that article that are racist or support Nazism. Could you show me where they are?

And if you can't then why would you sanction someone making that kind of ugly smear? If someone made a false accusation against you, wouldn't you want them to provide some form of evidence that you could refute?

I would have thought that your next post would have addressed these, but it didn't. So what are your answers?

- Bill

Post 32

Friday, February 26, 2010 - 12:31am

In keeping with my unabashed support for snobbery, let me recommend a book entitled In Defense of Elitism by William A. Henry III. From the dust jacket:

"Americans stubbornly cling to the myth of egalitarianism -- that all people, ideas, and cultures are of equal worth. Since World War II, that relativist value has increasingly crowded out all others. In what is sure to be the most controversial book of the year, Pulitzer Prize-winning critic William A. Henry III debunks some our most cherished beliefs: that everyone is, in essence, alike (and should be); that self-fulfillment is more important than objective achievement [actually I might agree here, although objective achievement should also be self-fulfilling], that everyone has something significant to contribute; that all cultures offer something equally worth knowing; that a truly just society would automatically produce equal success results across the lines of race, class, and gender; and that the common man is almost always right. Citing examples that range from the classroom to the courtroom, from the marketplace to the movies, Henry persuasively argues that these seductively democratic notions are hopelessly wrong -- not for abstract reasons but because they so plainly defy common sense."

- Bill

Post 33

Friday, February 26, 2010 - 5:53am

Yes, that is an excellent slim book - well worth the reading...

Post 34

Friday, February 26, 2010 - 9:08am

Bill,
I have no problem with elitism as defined as promoting and striving for excellence in any field of endeavor. However, you have failed to explain how trashing the superbowl is promoting the fine arts. What better example of the "culturally superior" trashing their "inferiors" exists than the Nazis? The word "inferior" in the title and the content of this article simply invites a Nazi comparison. The true inferiority complexes on this board delight in the opportunity to trash popular culture and are irritated that Howard rained on their parade. I think Thomas Sowell would make the observation that todays virtuoso armpit noise maker is tomorrows symphony orchestra trumpet player. It is simply an error to trash the former in order to "promote" the latter.

Post 35

Friday, February 26, 2010 - 11:07am

Mike,

You wrote,

I have no problem with elitism as defined as promoting and striving for excellence in any field of endeavor.

I'm glad to hear that, Mike, but that's not all that Henry means by "elitism." He is also defending the idea that some cultures are superior to others. Do you have a problem with that? Evidently, you do, as your following statement suggests:

However, you have failed to explain how trashing the superbowl is promoting the fine arts. What better example of the "culturally superior" trashing their "inferiors" exists than the Nazis? The word "inferior" in the title and the content of this article simply invites a Nazi comparison.

First of all, "trashing" the superbowl isn't promoting the fine arts. Who said it was? Yes, Ms. York is promoting the fine arts, but she is also promoting certain cultural and artistic standards, in which some are superior to others. And as Henry's book suggests, that's a good thing, not something to be decried. It is simply absurd to say that the word "inferior" in the title of her article invites a Nazi comparison. Some cultural and artistic standards are inferior to others. If I were to accept your argument, I couldn't even say the Nazis themselves were inferior. I couldn't argue that any cultural or artistic standard is inferior, no matter how depraved or revolting. Is that your position?

The true inferiority complexes on this board delight in the opportunity to trash popular culture and are irritated that Howard rained on their parade.

I had to laugh when I read that. What is your evidence that those who trash popular culture have an inferiority complex? Earlier you said that they had a superiority complex. But they must have some kind of complex, right? You just aren't sure which one.

I think Thomas Sowell would make the observation that todays virtuoso armpit noise maker is tomorrows symphony orchestra trumpet player. It is simply an error to trash the former in order to "promote" the latter.

So, it's an error to criticize bad art in order to promote good art, because today's bad artist could become tomorrow's master? Did I get that right?

- Bill

Post 36

Friday, February 26, 2010 - 11:58am

Bill:

First of all, "trashing" the superbowl isn't promoting the fine arts. Who said it was? Yes, Ms. York is promoting the fine arts, but she is also promoting certain cultural and artistic standards, in which some are superior to others.

That's ridiculous, do the people who put together the Superbowl event claim they are putting forth fine art? It's an improper standard to compare the Superbowl to, and it's wrong to guilt people into thinking they are participating in some culturally degenerate event. It is first of all a sporting event, and the commercials are for selling a product, which if it succeeds in selling more of that product, it has succeeded in its stated goals. It is not nor does it pretend to be "fine art".

Post 37

Friday, February 26, 2010 - 1:01pm

But John; you're missing the point. They should be putting forth art. Isn't that what Ms. York is saying? And when the music is performed during the intermission, you sit there politely and listen attentively, and, perhaps, if the mood strikes you, you tap your foot ever so discreetly. Think about how people in other countries might perceive your actions. We all know how important that is.

Post 38

Friday, February 26, 2010 - 1:24pm

John,

You missed the point Bill made. Because her normal role is promoting the fine arts does NOT mean her critical article had anything at all to do with fine arts. She was not comparing the Superbowl or the commercials to fine arts - not at all - go look.

She criticized what she saw within its OWN context - as things that could have been better as behaviors, and as commercials. She believes the expression of our culture in this instance did not represent man as he should be, or life as it could be, or our country in a good light. Those are themes that can be applied in fine arts, but the sense of life behind them is also expressed (or not) in pop culture, pop art, pop music, etc.

Then others got all upset as if you can not criticize anything in the popular culture unless you are willing to be called an elite snob with a superiority complex.

I only got into this because Campbell called her a fascist and racist for her criticism. And that is the only thing that I think is important enough to warrant serious posting in this thread.

Post 39

Friday, February 26, 2010 - 2:49pm