The rapt millions thronging St Peters' Square were overwhelmed by the love of our Lord as His new earthly voice spoke from between the magnificent 'Arco D'Oro' of the Holy Place and echoed blissfully across the world by the blessed gift of Sky News inc.
"Una Die, Una Chiesa, Una Papa."
The multitudinous faithful tore their rainment and wept in gratitude that at last here was a leader fit to rescue the souls of the meek from the evil temptations of the demonic Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In, Rhoda, and The Monkees. They waved their traditional red and yellow 'Macdonni' flags in obeysance to the glorious, unshakeable godhead who would restore Catholic pride and reclaim the Church's rightful historic destiny after a decline which has lasted a thousand years..
"Viva Papa! Viva Papa!" the chanted mindlessly.
Ex-Cardinal Razzo Von Gruppenfurher's rise to power from his provincial Bavarian power base is now complete. From the terrible night of his original vision of The Beatles themselves in a bierkeller in Munich, he has dedicated his life to restoring humanity to the arms of the Holy Cee. His unshakeable faith and discipline will lead the Catholic Church into a new Thousand Year reign in the name of the Ultimate Truth, restoring Order whre there was once Decadence and Sonny Bono. Doctrinal orders will be obeyed. Resistance is useless.
Will the decadent forces of evil sustain their campaign of bestial curiousity into God's Creation? Or will they turn from their filthy perverted ways and succumb to overwhelming religious evidence? That is the question the world must ask itself this morning.
This is our last spiritual claim on your souls.
Meanwhile, in a camp in a war-torn country, a baby takes its first steps...
(Mel Gibson is 76)
4/20/2005
4/14/2005
The Jerry Springer Show The Opera The War
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2812th post - 9 Jan 2005 15:11
QP
It was utter trash, (I was going to call it pure and simple, but it wasn't either).
The BBC has clearly lost all sense of direction, it's time for a mercy killing. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 605th post - 10 Jan 2005 15:27
If you think this was bad, what about the plans to broadcast the spectacle of two naked men causing each other as much pain as possible, And not out of any genuine grievance, but merely for spectacle and money.
Surely real obscenity is more obscene than verbal obscenity?
And I'm not tallking about your prose. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2852nd post - 10 Jan 2005 16:27
Little Richardjohn
I would be as much against such a broadcast as the Jerry Springer "opera", for similar reasons. It would have a different context though, since the discomfort of the artists would, in that case, probably match that of the audience. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 610th post - 11 Jan 2005 11:00
When did the context ever worry you?
The context of the obscene words made them totally acceptable to a grown-up audience. The context of the pantomime Godhead cross-dressing motifs was of the semi-lunatic American consciousness exhibited daily by Springer, and which demands that the individual MUST assume an identity with the highest status possible. (The believers in reincarnation who were ALWAYS Cleopatra or Solomon or Robin Hood, in this case - Jebus)
That does not make it Blasphemy - that makes it documentary.
It is not theologically possible for non-believers to commit blasphemy anyway. I cannot disrespect something I do not believe exists. And to accuse me, or the BBC, of blasphemy is an insult to our intelligence actually.
The context of the entire argument is that of a drama. A product of imagination. Use yours.
And the next time the BBC schedules a boxing match. I'll expect to see you protesting outside TV Centre.
And I think it is fine to put it on TV in a country which is totally familiar with all the 4 letter words used in the libretto (we invented them) and for an opera audience which knows how a libretto works in an operatic context, which is as another musical instrument in the orchestra - which naturally involves repetition to the rhythm or within the melody or sub melody or to re-state a dramatic musical theme or signature. Wagner, Rossini and Joe Green did it all the time.
We are a grown up country. And if we can stomach the sight of two men ACTUALLY trying to kill each other, I'm sure we can put up with, and even enjoy the sight of a media sewer rat like Springer being tortured for his sins.
It’s exactly what the BBC was set up to do. Sadly, some fell on stony ground [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2898th post - 11 Jan 2005 12:26
Little Richardjohn
The fact that you and others might enjoy seeing anyone tortured for entertainment, whether in a play or real life, speaks volumes about the moral basis of your views about this "opera".
I have no critical statements to make about the musical integrity of the event - the music was irrelevant to the point of the play. Comparing this with Wagner or Rossini is laughable (even though I don't like Wagner). [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 615th post - 11 Jan 2005 15:20
What is Hell for? And how can anything have a moral basis if there is no dramatic atonement of some kind? In this case Hell was very appropriate, seeing as how 99.9% of Americans seem to believe in it.
I was being ironic.. Now I see my problem. If you'd ever heard an opera you'd recognise the use of the repeated libretto convention.
This production made a big thing of parodying Opera itself, hence the title. So formal structures like this would be enhanced. That is what parody does.
I was going to mention the fact that theatre audiences are regularly presented with scenes of torture and obscenity and have been for three thousand years, but I won’t bother.
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2903rd post - 11 Jan 2005 17:20
Little Richardjohn
My main enjoyment and relaxation is music, and has been for the past thirty years.
For you to adopt a lecturing tone to me about the musical merits of this farcical obscenity, and to imply that the musical parody in it somehow justified the rest of the obnoxious content is quite amusing.
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 618th post - 11 Jan 2005 19:03
As for using music for enjoyment and relaxation, that doesn't mean you know anything about it or know it when you hear it.
Music isn't nice wallpaper or a scented candle. It should change your life, if it's worth anything. The best music does just that. It doesn't comfort and relax you and reassure you that all's for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
And if you deny that Verdi or Puccini used constant repetition in their libretti, then we haven't been listening to the same operas.
The long "fu-fu-fu-fu" chorus was a delightful piece of musical and poetical brinkmanship and satirised opera at its worst. It was also very funny.
Not as funny as the dancing Klan, though. And the eternal anal-barbed-wire image was almost as deft as Tom Lehrer's "Soon you will be sliding down the razor blade of Life."
This wasn't the great masterpiece that some have claimed, though it is one of the most ambitious bits of musical theatre of the last twenty years. The arts centre fingers were still pawing at it a bit. It still seemed to be performing itself to an audience of mates. And these are not a great musical team. They would never claim that for themselves. But it is a great idea. It is a brilliantly cohesive assault on American culture and on the squalid ideology which drives it. And when you're using parody for satirical effect, that means using the language of the gutter. Using it to death. Like any good satirist does. See any edition of The Simpsons, The Fast Show, The Royle Family, Vic and Bob or virtually any funny British comedy of the past ten years..
Words aren't filthy, meanings and actions are filthy. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2914th post - 12 Jan 2005 11:51
Little richardjohn
"And as for using music for enjoyment and relaxation, that doesn't mean you know anything about it or know it when you hear it"
But I do, so your little snipe at me is worthless.
"Words aren't filthy, meanings and actions are filthy"
Exactly, and the "meaning" of the repetitious crudity and the blasphemy in this show was to create a reaction that the musical and artistic content of the show could not do on its own. It was there for effect, and the effect was quite unpleasant.
I accept that such crudity may be popular and funny to some, but to hail it as some form of high art worthy of acclaim and broadcast on the BBC is nonsense. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 619th post - 12 Jan 2005 12:50
"effect, and the effect was quite unpleasant"
The effect was there for a purpose. In art, all effect is for a purpose.
You seem to think that all art should be nice.
Then sit back with your Barry Manilow records and your box of After Eights and everything will seem nice.
In the meantime, there are questions to be asked and a world to explore and truths about ourselves to face which are extremely unpleasant.
Art is the only way of honestly confronting those problems. And Jerry Springer, The Opera did just that. And at the same time, to those willing to also admit that there are problems, it was hugely entertaining. But to get the joke, you first have to admit that the world isn't perfect. But as a member of the Art for Art's Sake Brigade, you are unable to do that. Art is a reflection of Life, not a lullaby. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2918th post - 12 Jan 2005 13:26
Little richardjohn
>>"Art is the only way of honestly confronting those problems"<<
What tosh!
If you have a sociological problem to deal with the best solution is to sit and discuss it sensibly and come to some agreement about how to deal with it. That may require education, legislation or any number of approaches.
Simply parodying the seedier aspects of real life in a sensationalist play or "opera" does not do anything to address (confront) the problem, in fact it makes the problem worse by continuing to spew obscenity into our daily lives in the name of "art" and "free speech".
>>"You seem to think that all art should be nice"<<
I have not made any such statement. Art can be unpleasant but good, and also pleasant but bad. JSO was both unpleasant and bad at the same time, as a piece of art, and it was simply offensive as a TV broadcast.
Your little joke about Barry Manilow is extremely childish. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 621st post - 12 Jan 2005 14:22
I thought so, another case of 'no place for politics in art'. One of the most dishonest statements in all of human discourse.
It is one of the most political statements you can make. And whether you like it or not, all art is political. And the more you try to avoid politics, the more political it becomes.
Artists are people. They are raised by other people in a world which effects the way they think. They worry about real things. It effects their work, and when they're at their happiest, resolves their problems with the world. You want art to be some kind of Margot Leadbetter cocktail party music ordered by catalogue from Fortnums, and not likely to disrupt the conversation about the best school in the area.
Now we're discovering the real depths.
Not only do you know nothing about art, but nothing about politics either. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2920th post - 12 Jan 2005 14:37
Little Richardjohn
>>"You want art to be some kind of Margot Leadbetter cocktail party music"<<
It is interesting that when someone's own arguments start to fail, they often resort to telling me what it is I think.
>>"Not only do you know nothing about art, but nothing about politics either."<<
It is interesting how the less convincing one's argument becomes, the more likely it is that personal insults and dismissive attitudes come to the fore.
Discussion closed, I think. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 623rd post - 12 Jan 2005 15:07
Not quite.
DEDUCING what you think from what you say, deducing. You’re too coy to actually say what you mean, so we have to read between the lines a bit, and there is a lot of room. That's fairly common practice I understand. And if my arguments are failing, perhaps you'd help to finish them off. All I hear is you proclaiming their death. So bury them.
It's quite obvious that you know nothing about politics or art or you wouldn't be so sanguine about declaring them incompatible, in spite of three thousand years of human art to draw on. All wasted on you.. That is the human tragedy, that its finest achievements go unappreciated by most humans, whether from famine, poverty and suffering - or by the British class system, which has always demanded that emotion be kept out of art, let alone politics, and melodramatic sentimental display put in its stead.
You would have King Lear with a happy ending, like Tolstoy wanted.
While we're on the subject, what's your take on the 'vile jelly scene..'? Bit gratuitous, what?
And as for Titus Andronicus..
You keep coming back with this stuff about art having no place in politics and expect to get away with it. This is a high speed internet forum. Not an Oxbridge debating society. In many other boards you would have been scorched hours ago. But I do wish you'd stand up for yourself instead of turning tail at the first sign of an unpleasant truth about your opinions...
But hang on, it was unpleasantness which worried you about the Opera... And music is there to solely sooth the savage beast and all that.
So what about the scene where they gouge out the old man's eyes?
One by one.
[reply] [Complain about this post]
QP
It was utter trash, (I was going to call it pure and simple, but it wasn't either).
The BBC has clearly lost all sense of direction, it's time for a mercy killing. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 605th post - 10 Jan 2005 15:27
If you think this was bad, what about the plans to broadcast the spectacle of two naked men causing each other as much pain as possible, And not out of any genuine grievance, but merely for spectacle and money.
Surely real obscenity is more obscene than verbal obscenity?
And I'm not tallking about your prose. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2852nd post - 10 Jan 2005 16:27
Little Richardjohn
I would be as much against such a broadcast as the Jerry Springer "opera", for similar reasons. It would have a different context though, since the discomfort of the artists would, in that case, probably match that of the audience. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 610th post - 11 Jan 2005 11:00
When did the context ever worry you?
The context of the obscene words made them totally acceptable to a grown-up audience. The context of the pantomime Godhead cross-dressing motifs was of the semi-lunatic American consciousness exhibited daily by Springer, and which demands that the individual MUST assume an identity with the highest status possible. (The believers in reincarnation who were ALWAYS Cleopatra or Solomon or Robin Hood, in this case - Jebus)
That does not make it Blasphemy - that makes it documentary.
It is not theologically possible for non-believers to commit blasphemy anyway. I cannot disrespect something I do not believe exists. And to accuse me, or the BBC, of blasphemy is an insult to our intelligence actually.
The context of the entire argument is that of a drama. A product of imagination. Use yours.
And the next time the BBC schedules a boxing match. I'll expect to see you protesting outside TV Centre.
And I think it is fine to put it on TV in a country which is totally familiar with all the 4 letter words used in the libretto (we invented them) and for an opera audience which knows how a libretto works in an operatic context, which is as another musical instrument in the orchestra - which naturally involves repetition to the rhythm or within the melody or sub melody or to re-state a dramatic musical theme or signature. Wagner, Rossini and Joe Green did it all the time.
We are a grown up country. And if we can stomach the sight of two men ACTUALLY trying to kill each other, I'm sure we can put up with, and even enjoy the sight of a media sewer rat like Springer being tortured for his sins.
It’s exactly what the BBC was set up to do. Sadly, some fell on stony ground [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2898th post - 11 Jan 2005 12:26
Little Richardjohn
The fact that you and others might enjoy seeing anyone tortured for entertainment, whether in a play or real life, speaks volumes about the moral basis of your views about this "opera".
I have no critical statements to make about the musical integrity of the event - the music was irrelevant to the point of the play. Comparing this with Wagner or Rossini is laughable (even though I don't like Wagner). [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 615th post - 11 Jan 2005 15:20
What is Hell for? And how can anything have a moral basis if there is no dramatic atonement of some kind? In this case Hell was very appropriate, seeing as how 99.9% of Americans seem to believe in it.
I was being ironic.. Now I see my problem. If you'd ever heard an opera you'd recognise the use of the repeated libretto convention.
This production made a big thing of parodying Opera itself, hence the title. So formal structures like this would be enhanced. That is what parody does.
I was going to mention the fact that theatre audiences are regularly presented with scenes of torture and obscenity and have been for three thousand years, but I won’t bother.
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2903rd post - 11 Jan 2005 17:20
Little Richardjohn
My main enjoyment and relaxation is music, and has been for the past thirty years.
For you to adopt a lecturing tone to me about the musical merits of this farcical obscenity, and to imply that the musical parody in it somehow justified the rest of the obnoxious content is quite amusing.
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 618th post - 11 Jan 2005 19:03
As for using music for enjoyment and relaxation, that doesn't mean you know anything about it or know it when you hear it.
Music isn't nice wallpaper or a scented candle. It should change your life, if it's worth anything. The best music does just that. It doesn't comfort and relax you and reassure you that all's for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
And if you deny that Verdi or Puccini used constant repetition in their libretti, then we haven't been listening to the same operas.
The long "fu-fu-fu-fu" chorus was a delightful piece of musical and poetical brinkmanship and satirised opera at its worst. It was also very funny.
Not as funny as the dancing Klan, though. And the eternal anal-barbed-wire image was almost as deft as Tom Lehrer's "Soon you will be sliding down the razor blade of Life."
This wasn't the great masterpiece that some have claimed, though it is one of the most ambitious bits of musical theatre of the last twenty years. The arts centre fingers were still pawing at it a bit. It still seemed to be performing itself to an audience of mates. And these are not a great musical team. They would never claim that for themselves. But it is a great idea. It is a brilliantly cohesive assault on American culture and on the squalid ideology which drives it. And when you're using parody for satirical effect, that means using the language of the gutter. Using it to death. Like any good satirist does. See any edition of The Simpsons, The Fast Show, The Royle Family, Vic and Bob or virtually any funny British comedy of the past ten years..
Words aren't filthy, meanings and actions are filthy. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2914th post - 12 Jan 2005 11:51
Little richardjohn
"And as for using music for enjoyment and relaxation, that doesn't mean you know anything about it or know it when you hear it"
But I do, so your little snipe at me is worthless.
"Words aren't filthy, meanings and actions are filthy"
Exactly, and the "meaning" of the repetitious crudity and the blasphemy in this show was to create a reaction that the musical and artistic content of the show could not do on its own. It was there for effect, and the effect was quite unpleasant.
I accept that such crudity may be popular and funny to some, but to hail it as some form of high art worthy of acclaim and broadcast on the BBC is nonsense. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 619th post - 12 Jan 2005 12:50
"effect, and the effect was quite unpleasant"
The effect was there for a purpose. In art, all effect is for a purpose.
You seem to think that all art should be nice.
Then sit back with your Barry Manilow records and your box of After Eights and everything will seem nice.
In the meantime, there are questions to be asked and a world to explore and truths about ourselves to face which are extremely unpleasant.
Art is the only way of honestly confronting those problems. And Jerry Springer, The Opera did just that. And at the same time, to those willing to also admit that there are problems, it was hugely entertaining. But to get the joke, you first have to admit that the world isn't perfect. But as a member of the Art for Art's Sake Brigade, you are unable to do that. Art is a reflection of Life, not a lullaby. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2918th post - 12 Jan 2005 13:26
Little richardjohn
>>"Art is the only way of honestly confronting those problems"<<
What tosh!
If you have a sociological problem to deal with the best solution is to sit and discuss it sensibly and come to some agreement about how to deal with it. That may require education, legislation or any number of approaches.
Simply parodying the seedier aspects of real life in a sensationalist play or "opera" does not do anything to address (confront) the problem, in fact it makes the problem worse by continuing to spew obscenity into our daily lives in the name of "art" and "free speech".
>>"You seem to think that all art should be nice"<<
I have not made any such statement. Art can be unpleasant but good, and also pleasant but bad. JSO was both unpleasant and bad at the same time, as a piece of art, and it was simply offensive as a TV broadcast.
Your little joke about Barry Manilow is extremely childish. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 621st post - 12 Jan 2005 14:22
I thought so, another case of 'no place for politics in art'. One of the most dishonest statements in all of human discourse.
It is one of the most political statements you can make. And whether you like it or not, all art is political. And the more you try to avoid politics, the more political it becomes.
Artists are people. They are raised by other people in a world which effects the way they think. They worry about real things. It effects their work, and when they're at their happiest, resolves their problems with the world. You want art to be some kind of Margot Leadbetter cocktail party music ordered by catalogue from Fortnums, and not likely to disrupt the conversation about the best school in the area.
Now we're discovering the real depths.
Not only do you know nothing about art, but nothing about politics either. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Sacha Chou - 2920th post - 12 Jan 2005 14:37
Little Richardjohn
>>"You want art to be some kind of Margot Leadbetter cocktail party music"<<
It is interesting that when someone's own arguments start to fail, they often resort to telling me what it is I think.
>>"Not only do you know nothing about art, but nothing about politics either."<<
It is interesting how the less convincing one's argument becomes, the more likely it is that personal insults and dismissive attitudes come to the fore.
Discussion closed, I think. [reply] [Complain about this post]
re: Springer The Review Little Richardjohn - 623rd post - 12 Jan 2005 15:07
Not quite.
DEDUCING what you think from what you say, deducing. You’re too coy to actually say what you mean, so we have to read between the lines a bit, and there is a lot of room. That's fairly common practice I understand. And if my arguments are failing, perhaps you'd help to finish them off. All I hear is you proclaiming their death. So bury them.
It's quite obvious that you know nothing about politics or art or you wouldn't be so sanguine about declaring them incompatible, in spite of three thousand years of human art to draw on. All wasted on you.. That is the human tragedy, that its finest achievements go unappreciated by most humans, whether from famine, poverty and suffering - or by the British class system, which has always demanded that emotion be kept out of art, let alone politics, and melodramatic sentimental display put in its stead.
You would have King Lear with a happy ending, like Tolstoy wanted.
While we're on the subject, what's your take on the 'vile jelly scene..'? Bit gratuitous, what?
And as for Titus Andronicus..
You keep coming back with this stuff about art having no place in politics and expect to get away with it. This is a high speed internet forum. Not an Oxbridge debating society. In many other boards you would have been scorched hours ago. But I do wish you'd stand up for yourself instead of turning tail at the first sign of an unpleasant truth about your opinions...
But hang on, it was unpleasantness which worried you about the Opera... And music is there to solely sooth the savage beast and all that.
So what about the scene where they gouge out the old man's eyes?
One by one.
[reply] [Complain about this post]
Papal Leaving Party Arrangements (JP2 Bye bye)
Life is fleeting and false. Heaven is eternal bliss. What IS the problem? Cease this boo-hooing! The old geezer's heading for the perpetual orgasm of heavenly congress with the overwhelming magnitude of ultimate holiness.Why is anyone sad? Catholics especially. They should be holding a global-send off with Trinity Triple-Party-Poppers, great troughs of communion wafers in fifty different flavours, oil tankers of specially reserved communion wine charging through the waves to bring their blessings to every corner of the catholic empire. A real blow-out. 'So buy me beer and whisky 'cos I'm going far away'...
The man has got it made - he's finally dead - the greatest aspiration any true religious believer could have, and he MADE IT! He's just been given his final papers and his contract and everything.
So why the sadness? Because deep down, we all know that he's not going to be on God's right hand, but merely wormfood, like everyone else, and that they know they will end up the same way.
The man has got it made - he's finally dead - the greatest aspiration any true religious believer could have, and he MADE IT! He's just been given his final papers and his contract and everything.
So why the sadness? Because deep down, we all know that he's not going to be on God's right hand, but merely wormfood, like everyone else, and that they know they will end up the same way.
Gospel & Hebridean Lining Up Synthesis
'Gospel Truth'posted 22-03-05 14:57 posted by Little Richardjohn:
Willie Ruff, famous jazz musician and college professor has noticed the structural similarities between antique Hebridean religious 'line- singing' and the Black Gospel music form.
The theory was recently aired on the Channel 4 program 'Gospel Truth' and carries a single overriding message.
Namely, that human beings adapt whatever they need from whatever culture they encounter to preserve their sense of identity and give expression to their feelings.
The ethnic or class differences do not matter. People are always greater than the differences which appear to divide them.
This leaves the isolationists and purists on both sides with the dilemma of explaining how their culture came to be the way it is.
Which tends to lead them to the conclusion that it has always been the same. That culture is a static, immovable object, defined by ethnicity, place and time, and unable to alter to address the questions of the obviously changing world around it.
Which is simply absurd.
typo
posted 22-03-05 14:57
Culture is a moving feast which changes as the environment around it changes. To try and prevent culture from changing is as futile as the French trying to prevent the english language becoming a part of the french language.Posts: 427
Franciscopizzaro
posted 22-03-05 14:58
Speak English or leave our country Posts: 647
Split Infinitive
posted 22-03-05 15:02
Personally I thought that the music all sounded as much like souix chanting as much as any other kind of music so I'll go for the more general answer to the debate. It's a sort of universal language of emotion.Posts: 1144
Franciscopizzaro
posted 22-03-05 15:30
I watch the programme last night and wasn't impress at all. The thing is, these revisionists always seem to find these stool pigeons Blacks to support their theory.
Next they will be telling us that Black music was a white invention. Infact, I have met kids who think Eminem invented hip-hop and that there's no such thing as Black music Posts: 647
Asarualim
posted 22-03-05 15:47
I watched bits of the programme last night and thought it was quite interesting. Gospel music is an entity in it's own right, but there does appear to be some influence from Gaelic psalm singing of the slave masters - which is just like any other musical genre, they're an amalgamation of various influences and can all be traced back to something. It would be interesting to trace the roots of this gaelic singing to see what influenced that - perhaps they got the idea from black roman soldiers singing on Hadrians wall.
Little Richardjohn
posted 22-03-05 20:12
Why is it treachery to point out that human beings are influenced by what they see and hear around them?
The isolationists' view would logically be that all black American music arrived fully formed from Africa. Which presupposes that it had always been that way. Which in turn assumes that the originators of the music were unable to use new forms to express themselves, but merely parroted the same forms as every previous generation. Which is a great insult to the humanity of their supposed ancestors.
Little Richardjohn
posted 22-03-05 20:19
When my mother was baptised in the local river, they had to break the ice. When my cousin was baptised, the minister died of a heart attack with her in his arms...
I think they finished the hymn as they took him away.
By the way, the two seminal baptist hymns - 'Amazing Grace' and 'Swing Low Sweet Chariot' are virtually the same hymn, only one is the other upside down.
Salma
posted 22-03-05 22:07
we spend too much time diiscussing wat is different that we forget abt the similarities!Posts: 390
Franciscopizzaro
posted 23-03-05 10:13
"We spend too much time discussing what is different that we forget abt{about} the similarities2" - Salma
Yeah, great speech How about practising what you preach in pratical terms or do you think, humanity can live in harmony without actually interracting with each other on a one to one basis?
People always like to spout the above comments about similarities when its comes to Black culture and art, in order for them to claim or water down black culture to suit their taste. But watch how fast their prejudice comes out on the issue of racism, suddently they have no contact with the people they claim to share similarities with in art and culture
What a load of BS
Little Richardjohn
posted 23-03-05 11:20
White Racists have tried to claim that nothing worthwhile could ever be produced by black people and that therefore black music must either be inferior or have white origins.
Willie Ruff's thesis casts doubt on ALL claims of ownership. It implies that culture simply doesn't work that way. And that to deny the dynamic, organic, free nature of culture is to deny that people have the ability to exchange ideas and visions of the world. The further implication being that without that kind of free cultural exchange, you will always have racism.
The flipside of claiming that any cultural form is the exclusive property of any one race or culture is the demand for cultural purity. A world in which cultures are either handed down from above and only change by decree. In other words, a monolithic, static totalitarianism.
Was the music that 1st generation slaves brought to America the same as the music played by their forefathers three hundred years before, d'you think? Would it not have come into contact with other tribes, or the Arab traders from the north? Or did it all spring fully-formed from some legendary prehistoric genius?
Then there was the trade with the south and even India in some cases. Pre-Magellan Africa was a much busier place than we were taught at school. And with trade comes influence. It's all around. And when it stops happening, we're all dead.
It boils down to this: if we're allowed to learn from other people - ANY people, we are more likely to be happy and stimulated and are more likely to find a way of expressing our emotions and our vision of the world. Not to mention being then unable to not respect the people we learn from.
If we're not allowed that basic human right, then our humanity is oppressed and outraged, and we're very unhappy and tend to get a gun and kill our classmates, or run people down in our cars. And we are also naturally suspicious of anyone who looks or behaves a bit differently from ourselves.
Culture is not a jewel to be locked up in a bankvault, it is a way of setting people free. Perhaps the only way.
Willie Ruff, famous jazz musician and college professor has noticed the structural similarities between antique Hebridean religious 'line- singing' and the Black Gospel music form.
The theory was recently aired on the Channel 4 program 'Gospel Truth' and carries a single overriding message.
Namely, that human beings adapt whatever they need from whatever culture they encounter to preserve their sense of identity and give expression to their feelings.
The ethnic or class differences do not matter. People are always greater than the differences which appear to divide them.
This leaves the isolationists and purists on both sides with the dilemma of explaining how their culture came to be the way it is.
Which tends to lead them to the conclusion that it has always been the same. That culture is a static, immovable object, defined by ethnicity, place and time, and unable to alter to address the questions of the obviously changing world around it.
Which is simply absurd.
typo
posted 22-03-05 14:57
quote:Couldn't agree more with you on this last paragraph on the absurdity of a static culture which never changes. The culture of Britain has never stayed the same. Witness the cultural movements of the pre-renaissance, the enlightenment, the right to vote for women, the conservatism of the Victorian era vs the sexual liberation of the 1960s to the current day where the US culture dominates.
Originally posted by Little Richardjohn:
"That culture is a static, immovable object, defined by ethnicity, place and time, and unable to alter to address the questions of the obviously changing world around it.
Which is simply absurd. "
Culture is a moving feast which changes as the environment around it changes. To try and prevent culture from changing is as futile as the French trying to prevent the english language becoming a part of the french language.Posts: 427
Franciscopizzaro
posted 22-03-05 14:58
Speak English or leave our country Posts: 647
Split Infinitive
posted 22-03-05 15:02
Personally I thought that the music all sounded as much like souix chanting as much as any other kind of music so I'll go for the more general answer to the debate. It's a sort of universal language of emotion.Posts: 1144
Franciscopizzaro
posted 22-03-05 15:30
I watch the programme last night and wasn't impress at all. The thing is, these revisionists always seem to find these stool pigeons Blacks to support their theory.
Next they will be telling us that Black music was a white invention. Infact, I have met kids who think Eminem invented hip-hop and that there's no such thing as Black music Posts: 647
Asarualim
posted 22-03-05 15:47
I watched bits of the programme last night and thought it was quite interesting. Gospel music is an entity in it's own right, but there does appear to be some influence from Gaelic psalm singing of the slave masters - which is just like any other musical genre, they're an amalgamation of various influences and can all be traced back to something. It would be interesting to trace the roots of this gaelic singing to see what influenced that - perhaps they got the idea from black roman soldiers singing on Hadrians wall.
Little Richardjohn
posted 22-03-05 20:12
quote:Willie Ruff is in no way a stool pigeon.
Originally posted by Franciscopizzaro:
"I watched the programme last night and wasn't impress at all. The thing is, these revisionists always seem to find these stool pigeons Blacks to support their theory.
Next they will be telling us that Black music was a white invention. Infact, I have met kids who think Eminem invented hip-hop and that there's no such thing as Black music."
Why is it treachery to point out that human beings are influenced by what they see and hear around them?
The isolationists' view would logically be that all black American music arrived fully formed from Africa. Which presupposes that it had always been that way. Which in turn assumes that the originators of the music were unable to use new forms to express themselves, but merely parroted the same forms as every previous generation. Which is a great insult to the humanity of their supposed ancestors.
Little Richardjohn
posted 22-03-05 20:19
quote:It's something to do with the 'Blue Notes' - the flatted fifths - the Devil's Interval - which pops up in music all over the world from flamenco to the Welsh Baptist Raptural chorus. Now there was music that meant it.
Originally posted by Split Infinitive:
"Personally I thought that the music all sounded as much like souix chanting as much as any other kind of music so I'll go for the more general answer to the debate. It's a sort of universal language of emotion."
When my mother was baptised in the local river, they had to break the ice. When my cousin was baptised, the minister died of a heart attack with her in his arms...
I think they finished the hymn as they took him away.
By the way, the two seminal baptist hymns - 'Amazing Grace' and 'Swing Low Sweet Chariot' are virtually the same hymn, only one is the other upside down.
Salma
posted 22-03-05 22:07
we spend too much time diiscussing wat is different that we forget abt the similarities!Posts: 390
Franciscopizzaro
posted 23-03-05 10:13
"We spend too much time discussing what is different that we forget abt{about} the similarities2" - Salma
Yeah, great speech How about practising what you preach in pratical terms or do you think, humanity can live in harmony without actually interracting with each other on a one to one basis?
People always like to spout the above comments about similarities when its comes to Black culture and art, in order for them to claim or water down black culture to suit their taste. But watch how fast their prejudice comes out on the issue of racism, suddently they have no contact with the people they claim to share similarities with in art and culture
What a load of BS
Little Richardjohn
posted 23-03-05 11:20
... People always like to spout the above comments about similarities when its comes to Black culture and art, in order for them to claim or water down black culture to suit their taste. But watch how fast their prejudice comes out on the issue of racism, suddently they have no contact with the people they claim to share similarities with in art and culture
White Racists have tried to claim that nothing worthwhile could ever be produced by black people and that therefore black music must either be inferior or have white origins.
Willie Ruff's thesis casts doubt on ALL claims of ownership. It implies that culture simply doesn't work that way. And that to deny the dynamic, organic, free nature of culture is to deny that people have the ability to exchange ideas and visions of the world. The further implication being that without that kind of free cultural exchange, you will always have racism.
The flipside of claiming that any cultural form is the exclusive property of any one race or culture is the demand for cultural purity. A world in which cultures are either handed down from above and only change by decree. In other words, a monolithic, static totalitarianism.
Was the music that 1st generation slaves brought to America the same as the music played by their forefathers three hundred years before, d'you think? Would it not have come into contact with other tribes, or the Arab traders from the north? Or did it all spring fully-formed from some legendary prehistoric genius?
Then there was the trade with the south and even India in some cases. Pre-Magellan Africa was a much busier place than we were taught at school. And with trade comes influence. It's all around. And when it stops happening, we're all dead.
It boils down to this: if we're allowed to learn from other people - ANY people, we are more likely to be happy and stimulated and are more likely to find a way of expressing our emotions and our vision of the world. Not to mention being then unable to not respect the people we learn from.
If we're not allowed that basic human right, then our humanity is oppressed and outraged, and we're very unhappy and tend to get a gun and kill our classmates, or run people down in our cars. And we are also naturally suspicious of anyone who looks or behaves a bit differently from ourselves.
Culture is not a jewel to be locked up in a bankvault, it is a way of setting people free. Perhaps the only way.
The Great Camarron & The Mountain Ash.
I was in the back of a minibus last week with a gypsy flamenco guitarist who suddenly started playing 'The Mountain Ash'. When I asked where he had learnt it, he said that El Camarron, generally acknowledged to be the greatest flamenco singer, used the melody as the basis for one of his 'falsettas'.
I know it's a fairly standard set of melodic intervals which have probably been arrived at independently over the centuries by dozens of musicians, but I still think it's interesting in that it highlighted for me the similarities between certain types of flamenco cante and Penillion.
The sense in both of the voice sailing emotionally over the instrumental sea. The ability to convey the impression of talking to the instrument while trying to appear to ignore it - like the early encounters of two people destined to be lovers, when it doesn't matter what is said, or whether questions are answered, as long as the dreamy dialogue continues.
When I told him how I knew it and nagged him to carry on, he played the flamenco improvisations on the theme for another five minutes. Is there something in this for Penillion Newydd? No I'm not proposing any sort of ghastly cross-over, but art forms have to move or die.
Flamenco is a case in point. It progressed and flourished so that now it is seen on the greatest stages in the world. Why can't Penillion do something similar? Because if it can't progress beyond its own borders and the ex-pat circuit, and does not absorb influences from the wide world, then Welsh culture will be that much less appreciated.
Does Bjōrk know abut Penillion? She should.
I know it's a fairly standard set of melodic intervals which have probably been arrived at independently over the centuries by dozens of musicians, but I still think it's interesting in that it highlighted for me the similarities between certain types of flamenco cante and Penillion.
The sense in both of the voice sailing emotionally over the instrumental sea. The ability to convey the impression of talking to the instrument while trying to appear to ignore it - like the early encounters of two people destined to be lovers, when it doesn't matter what is said, or whether questions are answered, as long as the dreamy dialogue continues.
When I told him how I knew it and nagged him to carry on, he played the flamenco improvisations on the theme for another five minutes. Is there something in this for Penillion Newydd? No I'm not proposing any sort of ghastly cross-over, but art forms have to move or die.
Flamenco is a case in point. It progressed and flourished so that now it is seen on the greatest stages in the world. Why can't Penillion do something similar? Because if it can't progress beyond its own borders and the ex-pat circuit, and does not absorb influences from the wide world, then Welsh culture will be that much less appreciated.
Does Bjōrk know abut Penillion? She should.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)