Holiday Reprise: Why Catholicism Is Beating Objectivism's Ass ... Still

Lindsay Perigo's picture
Submitted by Lindsay Perigo on Tue, 2008-12-02 07:20

There's no mystery whatsoever about this. Take this in:

Yes, even though the performance is fashionably homogenised and rushed, the beauty of Schubert's Ave Maria—glorious music set to evil lyrics—remains irresistible to anyone with a soul. Until it can answer this, Objectivism will languish. Until we have not just a bunch of Halley concertos, but an understanding of their objective necessity and superiority, we will get nowhere. Hate to sound like a cracked record, but we have not been found wanting in epistemology, economics or politics. It's the esthetics, Stoopid. As I've said so many times, it's time for Objectivists to take The Romantic Manifesto seriously. More than that—to affirm unabashedly the objective superiority of Romantic music.


( categories: )

Boaz: "If you want something

Peter's picture

Boaz: "If you want something near tragic, take the slow movement of opus 110. " I think "tragic" is a rather big word here. The movement is called "arioso dolente" (after an introduction in recitative form), or a sad arioso, and I think that is an apt description. It continues without a break into a majestic fugue. At a certain point the arioso returns and then follows the fugue in inverted form, leading to a resounding climax in A flat major.

Ah, My Beautiful Boaz

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Lindsay --
You perplex me. First you profess your love. Then you call me an ARI drone again. Kindly make up your mind one of these days, please!

Can't I love you as you are, flaws and all? Evil

I don't have time for this passive aggressive shit.

Damn! And I was hoping you'd be versatile!

By the way, the only music Catholicism is responsible for is Gregorian Chant. We're not even talking about the issue of who's responsible for the Renaissance, which is a much closer question. As for individual composers -- yeah, they were religious. They were inspired by religion, yes. What does that have to do with Catholicism kicking Objectivism's ass?

Its music hits the spot of nobleness.

Miscellanea

Boaz the Boor's picture

Olivia -- yes, of course. Fond memories of Claudia die hard, especially here in Cali where women prefer their men gay, metro or stupid. Forgive the impertinence and a young, handsome conductor you shall have.

Jameson --

What is your real name, boy?!

Boaz. But I prefer Boaz the Boor. Lindsay does have a way with words, doesn't he? Especially during one his adorable that-time-of-the-month hissy fits. Evil

And, believe it or not, "Force Majeure" isn't far from what my name means in biblical Hebrew. Something about the power or name of God. Does that scare you? You Aussie git? Wanker? Malaka? Scalawag? Good, now quickly apologize or you'll have to pay for it in blood when I come all the way over there and punch your lights out. Punk.

Lindsay --

You perplex me. First you profess your love. Then you call me an ARI drone again. Kindly make up your mind one of these days, please! I don't have time for this passive aggressive shit.

By the way, the only music Catholicism is responsible for is Gregorian Chant. We're not even talking about the issue of who's responsible for the Renaissance, which is a much closer question. As for individual composers -- yeah, they were religious. They were inspired by religion, yes. What does that have to do with Catholicism kicking Objectivism's ass?

Leonid --

Beethoven wrote many sonatas and many symphonies. Most of his music has nothing to do with the emotions you're talking about. And your example of the Appassionatta is inadequate because it isn't tragic. It's angry and diabolical and determined. (If you want something near tragic, take the slow movement of opus 110. Somebody should link to it, it's really a magical piece -- and Beethoven was nominally Catholic, so it belongs on this thread.)

Music and a Person's Sense Of Life

Wayne Simmons's picture

Many have made strong claims that a person's musical tastes result from a person's value judgement that reveals the person's sense of life. This could be true or it could be false. If all you know is a person's musical taste how can you draw a conclusion about a person's sense of life? This is a non sequitur.

Sure I can concede that my musical tastes - which are very open to many different genres - results from my value judgements. But those values need not be of the origins Linz and others claim them to be. Person A can like listening to heavy rock n roll and be a totally different kind of person psychologically from Person B who likes the exact same kind of music. This has been my experience. My knowledge of reality trumps the rationalism of many Objectivists (who are not being Objectivists in this area). So continue on with your rationalism because it proves nothing.

Leonid: " I think that few

Peter's picture

Leonid: " I think that few would disagree that Beethoven's music represents concretization of tragic struggle, heroic, but doom to fail. The best example is 5th symphony."

Sorry, but that is complete nonsense. Did you ever listen to van Beethoven's 5th symphony? Then you'd know that it ends in a big triumph march in C major that has nothing tragic about it. Anyway, all van Beethoven's symphonies are either quite positive, or, as the "heroic" symphonies 3, 5 and 9, end in a positive, winning mood. Even the Ouverture Egmont - music to a tragic story - ends triumphant. So the whole notion of van Beethoven's music as "tragic", let alone "malevolent", is complete bullshit. If you want some really tragic music of doom and gloom, take Tchaikovsky's 6th symphony. Now there you can hear a malevolent universe!

The song, of course ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... is Granada!

Granada, tierra sonada por mi,
mi cantar se vuelve gitano
cuando es para ti.
Mi cantar, hecho de fantasia;
mi cantar, flor de melancolia,
que yo te vengo a dar.
Granada, tierra ensangrentada
en tardes de toros,
mujer que conserva el embrujo
de los ojos moros.
De sueno, rebelde, gitana
cubierta de flores,
y beso tu boca de grana,
jugosa manzana
que me habla de amores.
Granada, manola, cantada
en coplas preciosas,
no tengo otra cosa que darte
que un ramo de rosas,
de rosas de suave fragrancia
que le dieran marco a la Virgen morena.
Granada, tu tierra esta llena
de lindas mujeres, de sangre y de sol.

Translation:
Granada, land of my dreams,
mine becomes a gypsy song
when I sing to you.
My song, born of fancy;
my song, melancholy flower,
that I've come to offer you.
Granada, land covered in blood
from the bullfighting afternoons,
woman who retains the spell
of Moorish eyes.
A dream-land, a rebel, a gypsy,
covered with flowers,
and I kiss your scarlet mouth,
juicy apple
that tells me about love affairs.
Granada, my beautiful, sung
in precious coplas,
I have nothing else to give you
but a bouquet of roses
worthy of adorning the brown-skinned Virgin.
Granada, your soil is full
of beautiful woman, blood and sunshine.

I love it!

Olivia's picture

Straight in with passionate drama and strength.
What is it? I'm curious to know the words in English.

"Do not go gentle into that good night
Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

If *I* said that ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I'd be in terrible strife and there'd be flouncings galore. Eye

Here's a sense of life for you. Yes, Mario again, just oozing charisma and joie de vivre:

Blues Sense of Life

Jameson's picture

Sharp oxymoron, Greg! Smiling

Blues Sense of Life

gregster's picture

William Beck the third turns out to be an exemplar of his creed.

Dickhead.

Go shoot some targets, with Scott's face central, you have let yourself down in my (own) estimation.

Leonid-a clarification

atlascott's picture

I did not mean to suggest that Rand was an anarchist or should or could be lumped in with lunatic anarchists. Just that a sub-group of those I term "intellectual" anarchists claim to be Rand influenced, while ignoring her her rejection of anarchy. From this misunderstanding flows the balance of your post in response to mine. We agree, I think, on the balance of your post.

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

Done, Billy

Lindsay Perigo's picture

If you said those things to me in person, I would drain you, too, you outgrown slug.

How did I just know you were going to say something like that? An object lesson in a headbanging sense of life. Moderated again.

Leonid...

Olivia's picture

couple of things:

She was talking about esthetic judgment, not value-judgemnt. They are two different thing, although one may claim that they could be interconnected. Think about a picture which could be esthetically perfect, but in terms of concretization of sense of life is appalling.

You cannot separate value-judgments from esthetics. Art, be it painting or music, is values based... or not... hence being able to make a judgment about whether it is good or bad. That is a sense of life thing.

Contrary to what Olivia thinks, music cannot be inspired by events or persons.

I didn't say music can be inspired by events or persons. I said it is inspired by values and human attributes, which are what our emotions respond to.

"Do not go gentle into that good night
Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

You're Wrong, Leonid

Billy Beck's picture

Leonid: "This is essentially Marxist idea which originated from the Marx's political theory of State as superstructure of class."

You can run that on someone else. Not one thing in the world -- nothing -- of which I am convinced has anything at all to do Marx. Nor do "Blanqui, Proudhon, and Bakunin," or Goldman or Zhelezniakov, Makhno, Eikhenbaum, Tucker, Mowbray, Sacco & Vanzetti, Berkman, Steimer, Brousse, Landauer or Fleming, or any of the rest of them have anything to do with me.

You can indict the commies all day long and it won't have one thing to do with me.

You are working a vector that is completely impertinent and wrong. It has nothing to do with the facts. That's a fact. What you do with it is your responsibility.

Do You Worst, Slug

Billy Beck's picture

Perigo: "I've unmoderated him and hope he can summon the good grace not to threaten anyone with punching his fucking lights out."

You can go straight to hell with my earnest compliments. Every single time that bastard -- or you or anyone else -- has the sorts of things to say about me that he has, I'll tell you the very same thing. You would not get away with it in person. You can think anything you want of this and do anything about it that you feel in your little chisler's heart, but it doesn't matter.

If you said those things to me in person, I would drain you, too, you outgrown slug.

No Kiddin'

Billy Beck's picture

Perigo: "I can't do fairer than that."

That's the goddamned truth, you bloated feeb.

Nice Work, For A Punk

Billy Beck's picture

De Salvo: "How about the part where you tell us that this culture deserves you at your worst? How about your generally shitty, angry attitude? Snide, sniping, garbage?

All out of frustration for the life you have chosen for yourself."

That is "your work"? You are as pathetic as I ever said you were, you crummy runt.

Look at him, ladies and gentlemen: he comes on with the sorts of assertions that he did, and when he's called on them, he becomes his inner fifth-grader.

This is why I despise him. He's a goddamned fraud.

What I wanna know is

Jameson's picture

will it be Mrs. Boaz the Boor, Mrs. Inego Montoya, or Mrs. Force Majeure?

What is your real name, boy?!

Lindsay: the case of ass beating

Leonid's picture

"Marsha Enright knows nothing fundamental about music"
That may well be, but she has very interested theory about how music induces emotional response. Have you? I read “Music of Gods" and we in agreement about your evaluation of contemporary music and nihilistic art in general. The dispute is about your presentation of Ayn Rand's position in this matter. I think I've clarified what I think about your position. The second point of dispute is that you treat music as like as it was literature or visual art. You've said in the “Music of Gods”: Richard Goode, Slayer’s cheerleader on the RACH thread, said there:

But hang on a minute! Pressed by me to explain just how a “good pounding by Slayer” made him “glad to be alive,” Dr. Goode responded as follows:

“Anger. Energy. Passion. Defiance. Catharsis. Slayer are musical genius.”

So, is it anger, etc., that makes Dr. Goode feel glad to be alive, that gives him his value-swoons? I tried to find out:

“Anger about what? Passion for what? Defiance of what? Given that ‘catharthis’ is the release of pent-up emotions, why are your emotions pent up (I did warn you that pomowanking makes one passionless)? Wherein lies Slayer's ‘musical genius’?”

Alas, my inquiries elicited no further response."

No wonder. Such a response could be given by novel or painting. Music induces pure emotions-period. And Marsha's article could elaborate a great deal to you on this matter.

But these two points are small change. My big issue with you is that you accepted collectivist-mystic premises that the work of genius belongs to Church and therefore could belong to State, Nation, Race, Gender, Tribe, Society, and so on. If one judges these "belongings" by art work's content that Handel’s “Messiah" belongs to Catholicism, his "Maccabis" to Judaism, “Heroic symphony" is legal property of French government and Tchaikovsky’s 6th symphony belongs to the Great Nation of Mother Russia, since he used few Russian folklore tunes. If by genius' religion or/and origin-that Malher works belong to Judaism, Wagner-to Protestantism, and " Atlas Shrugged" is jointly owned by Russia and Israel. Ridiculous, doesn't it? And to what belongs Bruch’s "Kol Nidrei”? According to you-to Orthodox Judaism. I think that you yourself see that your position is undefendable.Is that why you are keeping to evade the full discussion of this matter? Come on, Lindsay, that's not like you. Bring up your arguments or simply admit that you are wrong. As long as Objectivists hold such ideas, their asses would (and should) be kicked for sure and rightly so.

Leonid

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Marsha Enright knows nothing fundamental about music. Again I draw your attention to Music of the Gods. There both you and she might learn something.

Boaz

Leonid's picture

What I said is that Beethoven's music mostly induces emotional response,compatable with heroic, tragic struggle. See, Boaz,tragic feelings, not tragic story. Tragic, because there is no victory in sight, no matter, how much one fights. Just compare your feelings induced by " Appasionata" with any Mozart's piano concerto, with Hendel's " Messia" (also belongs to Catholicism?) or with works of Chopen. Contrary to what Olivia thinks, music cannot be inspired by events or persons. Even "Heroic symphony" which had been inspired by Napoleon has nothing to do with this self-appointed Emperor. And after Beethoven became disappointed with Napoleon did his symphony became worse or better? Music has to do only with one thing-directly induced emotional response and to be appreciated only by introspection. One is listening to the musical piece and think " that what I feel-elation, sadness, tragedy, joy, or nothing". Here is to you at least one criterion to distuinguish good music from the bad one. Music,to which you feel nothing is junk. For the full discussion on the theory of music I recommend the article " Con Molto Sentimento" by Marsha Familaro Enright, published in " Objectivity" Vol2,Number3 pg 117 (available on website)

Olivia

Leonid's picture

"If one can say that..."- but that is obvious. Nobody disputes that, and last of all Ayn Rand. She was talking about esthetic judgment, not value-judgemnt. They are two different thing, although one may claim that they could be interconnected. Think about a picture which could be esthetically perfect, but in terms of concretization of sense of life is appalling. Linsday substituted first for second and on this basis claims that Rand approves on junk. That simply wrong.This is full presentation of Rand's position "Now a word of warning about the criteria of esthetic judgment. A sense of life is the source of art, but it is not the sole qualification of an artist or of an esthetician, and it is not a criterion of esthetic judgment. Emotions are not tools of cognition. Esthetics is a branch of philosophy—and just as a philosopher does not approach any other branch of his science with his feelings or emotions as his criterion of judgment, so he cannot do it in the field of esthetics. A sense of life is not sufficient professional equipment. An esthetician—as well as any man who attempts to evaluate art works—must be guided by more than an emotion.

The fact that one agrees or disagrees with an artist’s philosophy is irrelevant to an esthetic appraisal of his work qua art. One does not have to agree with an artist (nor even to enjoy him) in order to evaluate his work. In essence, an objective evaluation requires that one identify the artist’s theme, the abstract meaning of his work (exclusively by identifying the evidence contained in the work and allowing no other, outside considerations), then evaluate the means by which he conveys it—i.e., taking his theme as criterion, evaluate the purely esthetic elements of the work, the technical mastery (or lack of it) with which he projects (or fails to project) his view of life . . .

Since art is a philosophical composite, it is not a contradiction to say: “This is a great work of art, but I don’t like it,” provided one defines the exact meaning of that statement: the first part refers to a purely esthetic appraisal, the second to a deeper philosophical level which includes more than esthetic values."

“Art and Sense of Life,” The Romantic Manifesto, 42.
Now, in music, as Rand claims, there is no objective criteria to a purely esthetic evaluation. It doesn't mean that there is no subjective appraisal. One always can say : this is junk, I don't like it, it sounds like vomiting. But if to somebody else it sounds like lullaby, one doesn't have objective means to argue his point.

Oh come on Boaz!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I'm the only one here with a *true* appreciation of Bruch. So it's me you have to marry, you traitor to your values!! You think Lady Slapper really understands? All her Bruch she got from me. Originally thought he was "Brooks." Hahahaha!

Still, I understand you're hopelessly heterosexual, so I give my blessing to you and Slapper. But understand you have a lot of educating to do. Though she's just switched on to Mario, which places her ahead of you. Hahahaha!

And, way better than you, she doesn't flounce when confronted with something that isn't the ARI party line. She thinks for herself. Doubt that you or ARI could cope with that. Hope I'm wrong.

Inego Montoya

Olivia's picture

...will you marry me?

Definitely maybe. I have fantasies about conductors with impeccable taste, especially young handsome ones. Eye

But only if you call me by my rightful name, Olivia.

"Do not go gentle into that good night
Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

Miscellaneous

Boaz the Boor's picture

[A short break between studying for freakishly hard exams.]

First: Claudia, will you marry me? I love Bruch. I conducted that violin concerto. Moreover, I'm young and handsome and you're obviously divine. Need I say more?

Second:

Leonid: There is a difference between musical standards and objective validation of esthetic judgments, don't you think? What Rand said in essence that you won't be able to justify your position why one likes one sort of music more than another in objective terms? This is epistemic, not esthetic problem.

That's very well put. I think it will one day be possible to demonstrate that much of classical music, of necessity, is objectively superior. There are structural reasons, for one: it is capable of producing greater emotional effects, by combining multiple elements into a narrative (stimulating effects akin to plot, with intense conflict and resolution). I don't have time to say more, unfortunately, or think about it much. But there is simply more "there" there -- more sound, more texture, more contrast, more color, more motion, etc. None of which makes Miles Davis or Led Zeppelin less worth listening to -- and there's the rub, Lindsay (or one of them, at least). There are damn good reasons to prefer the latter two to much of what passes for "classical" in music. You need to make your argument on the level of generality of music theory and the psychology of art.

As for this: I think that few would disagree that Beethoven's music represents concretization of tragic struggle, heroic, but doom to fail. The best example is 5th symphony.

Utter crap. This is objectivist cant, cliche and hogwash. And you're contradicting yourself, because you've just told us that we don't know how to demonstrate (much less conceptualize) how music can represent things like "heroic" and "doomed to fail" -- the perceptual-conceptual nexus and formula is missing, as you well know. But even on a raw perceptual level, much of Beethoven is nowhere near "doomed", even (and I daresay *especially*) the 5th symphony.

Leonid...

Olivia's picture

If one can say that, as far as human attributes are concerned; heroism, dignity, depth, independence, tenderness, beauty, triumph, reason and romanticism are objectively superior values to cowardice, shame, fickleness, dependence, brutality, ugliness, defeat, irrationality and pragmatism, then it seems obvious to me that music which not only elevates these values, but is inspired by them, is objectively superior to music which doesn’t and isn’t.

"Do not go gentle into that good night
Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

Linsday

Leonid's picture

Yes. I did, and you haven't. You clearly cannot distinguish between esthetic and epistemic problem. And in any case to blame Rand for the musical preferences of our age is unfair at its very least. To accept the claim that great art belongs to religion is to accept collectivist-mystical premises. You have to answer this as well.

Leonid

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I've already answered all this in Music of the Gods, which you clearly haven't read. Read it!!

Lindsay

Leonid's picture

"I think she was completely ignorant. If she weren't, she wouldn't have made the very stupid claim that there are no objective standards in music, to which claim musical nihilists like Joe so gleefully repair!"

If you decide to quote Rand, why not to do it properly? The sources are easy available. That what she said about standards in music:" The formulation of a common vocabulary of music . . . would require: a translation of the musical experience, the inner experience, into conceptual terms; an explanation of why certain sounds strike us a certain way; a definition of the axioms of musical perception, from which the appropriate esthetic principles could be derived, which would serve as a base for the objective validation of esthetic judgments . . . .

Until a conceptual vocabulary is discovered and defined, no objectively valid criterion of esthetic judgment is possible in the field of music . . .

No one, therefore, can claim the objective superiority of his choices over the choices of others. Where no objective proof is available, it’s every man for himself—and only for himself." (“Art and Cognition,” The Romantic Manifesto, 55)

There is a difference between musical standards and objective validation of esthetic judgments, don't you think? What Rand said in essence that you won't be able to justify your position why one likes one sort of music more than another in objective terms? This is epistemic, not esthetic problem. To conclude that Rand's meaning was that music has no objective value is gross misunderstanding. Music, as any other art form is concretization of sense of life. I think that few would disagree that Beethoven's music represents concretization of tragic struggle, heroic, but doom to fail. The best example is 5th symphony.
Now please read this aloud:" Than they are flying downward and she sees the bridge growing to meet them-a small tunnel of metal lace work, struck by a long ray of sunset light. Dagny hears the rising, accelerating sound of the wheels- and some theme of music: the Fifth Concerto by Richard Halley. The diagonals of the bridge went smearing across the windows, the sweep of their downward plunge was carrying them up a hill; the derricks of Wyatt Oil are reeling before them-Pat Logan turns and says “ that’s that” The train came to stop." (AS). If you don't hear the rhythm and music in this piece (very similar to the 3rd movement of Rachmaninov 3rd concerto) than you are tune-deaf and that is your discussion of music is academic only. BTW, I apologize for misspelling of your name. Perhaps, it was Freudian slip.

Feast, then ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Smiling

Food for thought...

Matty Orchard's picture

Food for thought...

Matty

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I'M having fun listening to it!

And I'll defend to the death your right to do so. Knock yourself out!

Doesn't alter the fact that you're a musical moron. That piece is utter rubbish.

But linz

Matty Orchard's picture

I'M having fun listening to it!

If I have fun when I listen to it doesn't that mean the song is fun?

Yet going by the same logic, your not having fun when listening to it proves the song is not fun!

It's almost as if two people can experience the same song in a completely different way. There's no way (that we know of) to scientifically prove why that is so or weather or not the song is indeed objectively fun.

 

Aesthetic Libertarianism

Landon Erp's picture

Nazi Germany would be a terrible place to live. You had the death camps and ghettos. And not to mention all the problems even aryans had to face. Freedom would be much better, chosing who you could love, what you could do with your life etc... Even living under absolute monarchs was probably terrible.

Just because some things are OBVIOUSLY good and OBVIOUSLY bad doesn't mean you should dispense with the need to understand what specifically is good, what specifically is bad and above all how both work.

In the medium I care about most the still living "old greats" are very comfortable with the fact that the "new kids" are OBJECTIVLY better than they themselves. It would be a tragedy if they weren't seeing as everyone today had the collected work of every person who came before them to learn from. To learn what was done right, and wrong. But above all to look into, disect, and see what made it work.

Just because certain things are obvious doesn't mean everything is and it doesn't even mean the things which aren't as obvious aren't as important.

The only thing that could be taken from that piece by someone who was trying to live up to YOUR standards would be "copy Beethoven," "copy Lanza" take these things as an undigested whole and copy as much as you can.

When you study a medium that is understood more greatly you understand that learning the flaws is sometimes even more important than learning the good points of something great. The good points include what has already been perfected, the flaws are where a new artist has something to contribute.

And the idea of someone saying that they value the study of aesthetics saying that this level of understanding along with the building blocks it would take to reach this just blows my mind.

---Landon

Never mistake contempt for compassion, or power lust for ambition.

http://www.myspace.com/wickedlakes

Super Hero Babylon

It's not music ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... he can't sing, and that's not fun, it's just stupid. And I'm quite happy with my sense of life, thank you very much.

Kinda serious

Matty Orchard's picture

The mountain dew song is hilarious, but I do genuinely like Daniel Johnstons music. He can't sing, can barely play his instruments yet his songs are catchy and fun as all hell. Get a sense of life!

 

Ha, Matty

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Your link shows that you believe that. It also shows your musical ignorance. About on a par with rooting for Obama. Everything is an unsurprising package deal at the end of the day.

Lindsay

Matty Orchard's picture

There are no objective standards in music.

Leonid

Lindsay Perigo's picture

First, my name is Lindsay.

Second, there's absolutely nothing wrong with Rand's love of "light," or "tiddly-wink" music. Doesn't alter the fact that in the realm of serious music she was an ignoramus. She said Beethoven's music was "malevolent," for starters. Complete and utter crap. Third, her description of Halley's Concerto was academic. She didn't understand or apply it to actual music. She may have liked the Rach 2 as she claimed, but there's so much more to Romantic music than that, of which I think she was completely ignorant. If she weren't, she wouldn't have made the very stupid claim that there are no objective standards in music, to which claim musical nihilists like Joe so gleefully repair!

Oh, and Matty apparently. Jesus, Matty, are you serious??!!

Real music

Matty Orchard's picture

Tell me THIS isn't genius:

Linsday

Leonid's picture

"She didn't answer it at all"- she answered it with her art, literature. Her achievements in this field are compatible with the greatest achievement of human spirit. I hope you don't think that "Atlas shrugged" belongs to Judaism and Mother-Russia because Ayn Rand was Russian-born Jew. I don't agree that Rand was musical ignoramus. First of all, from my personal experience I know that to grow up in Sanct-Petersburg in the middle-class family and not to be exposed to very serious amount of classical music is virtually impossible. Secondly, Kira Argunova's prototype is Ayn herself and Kira was opera and concert goer.Thirdly, I cannot see how the love for light music can disqualify Rand to appreciate the serious one. And finaly, how the person who created heart-taken story of piano concerto and managed to describe fictional music (!) in such a way that one can actually hear it, how such a person could possibly be musical ignoramus???

Landon

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Tell me what I haven't told you. Have you read Music of the Gods? In what respect does it leave you unsatisfied? You and Joe reserve the right to defend headbanging caterwauling on whim. Fair enough. That's your right. But I've given you objective evidence of Romanticism's superiority. I have the knowledge and have done the work. Please actually address that, and stop acting like [sic] I haven't.

Again with the musical Libertarianism

Landon Erp's picture

Linz you haven't defined Romantic music the way Rand defined Romantic Literature. Rand was at least honest enough to admit she didn't have much to add on musical aesthetic theory. You've added even less and act as if you've done more.

Aesthetic philosophy is exceptionally hard work. Either do that work or stop acting like you alreday have.

---Landon

Never mistake contempt for compassion, or power lust for ambition.

http://www.myspace.com/wickedlakes

Super Hero Babylon

Sorry, Lindsay...

Jameson's picture

I cut and pasted the wrong clip... :-/

But what do I know?: I'm a musical ignoramus too. Smiling

No, Glenn ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

There's nothing "ignoramus" about Fred and Ginger, and they're way ahead of Maurone and Beck. What I meant by "musical ignoramus" is that she really had no clue about Rach and Tchaik and Beethoven and Chopin or Mario Lanza or Maria Callas and all the rest, and should have simply shut the fuck up! Or rather, learned to apply her own principles consistently. Smiling

Linsday

Leonid's picture

"The highest achievements of the human spirit still do belong to Catholicism "
The achievements of human spirit belong to humans, not to religions. These humans could be Catholics, Jews or Muslims, but achievements are theirs to stay. They are results of individual effort, personal struggle, inspiration, hard work. To ascribe achievement of the genius to the Church he belongs is to rob him from his achievement, pretty much as Soviet government ascribed achievement of Soviet musicians, sportsmen, scientists to Communist ideology and contemporary Russians claim that Tchaykovsky belongs to Mother-Russia, great Russian Nation-which prosecuted and killed him. This is mystical collectivism per excelence.If you think that they are right, then Shubert belongs to Catholicism. I, however, think that "Ave Maria" belongs only to Shubert and Shubert belongs to Shubert.

Here's one of Ayn's favourites...

Jameson's picture

To make your point, Lindsay. Smiling

Nope!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

She didn't answer it at all, because she had no clue as to why Romantic music was objectively superior. As with homosexuality, she should have simply stayed away from that about which she had no clue. She was a musical ignoramus.

Linsday

Leonid's picture

I don't see how it makes the context clear. You said "Until it can answer this, Objectivism will languish." I think that Ayn Rand answered this many times over.

Because, Leonid ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

The highest achievements of the human spirit still do belong to Catholicism. How can you listen to Mario and doubt it? Precisely my point. Objectivists still haven't learned to emulate Roark. Precisely my point again. When "Objectivists" on SOLO, of all places, defend headbanging caterwauling under such pomo-pretexts as "priceless" (wouldn't want to be like Linz), I know the battle hasn't even yet begun!!

To make the context clear

Lindsay Perigo's picture

When Mario sings this in Serenade, he finds his voice again after losing it because of unrequited love; finds it in the face of nagging from Sarita Montiel, the woman in the video.

Lindsay

Leonid's picture

Don't worry, Lindsay, I'm here all the time and I know what you appreciate.That why I wonder how you failed to make a distinction between religion and art, how you managed to ascribe one of the highest achievements of the human spirit to Catholicism, which essence is self-negation, humility, death.It's like to call Howard Roark good Catholic because he builded Temple.

Ha!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

From an earlier post I deduce that Leonid thinks I haven't heard, let alone learned to appreciate, Tchaik 1 or Rach 3. Where the hell has he been??!! Smiling

So start a new thread...

Jameson's picture

... and leave this one in peace.

Jameson

Leonid's picture

I don't squable, Jameson, but to call Rand anarchist is as ungodly as to perform " Ave Maria" by heavy metal band

Leonid...

Jameson's picture

best you take your squabbling outside. Today, this is the house of Godliness. Smiling

Atlascott

Leonid's picture

“have always observed that there are fundamentally two schools of Anarchism. The first are anti-intellectual emotionalists who believe that the universe has no meaning or purpose, so entropy and chaos and anarchy is man's fate--and, I guess, ~proper~ for man. In other words, nihilism. The second are the "intellectual" anarchists whose libertarian-influenced subgroup's underpinnings include Rand, but generally, whose primary failings are a problem with being concrete-bound and rationalistic."

You are wrong by including Rand in the group of intellectual anarchists. Anarchism is political concept which means ""Absence of government; a state of lawlessness due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder."[1]
"A theoretical social state in which there is no governing person or body of persons, but each individual has absolute liberty (without the implication of disorder)."[2]
"Absence or non-recognition of authority and order in any given sphere."[3] " (Wikipedia)

This is essentially Marxist idea which originated from the Marx's political theory of State as superstructure of class. According to Marx, State's function is not to protect its citizens from violation of their natural rights, but to protect interests of the ruling class and enable capitalists to exploit workers. (Hence anarchists inherently dislike State as such). In Marxists communist Utopia classes will disappear and therefore State will disappear as well. Who will protect citizens of such a State from external aggression, criminals, conmen, who will be a safeguard of long and short-term contracts, who will resolve honest commercial disputes Marx doesn't indicate. Presumably in his Utopia all these evils of capitalism will disappear as well. The first bunch of anarchists was Marxists: Blanqui, Proudhon, and Bakunin. According to anarchist communist Peter Kropotkin and later Murray Bookchin, the members of communist society would spontaneously perform all necessary labour because they would recognize the benefits of communal enterprise and mutual aid.Kropotkin believed that private property was one of the causes of oppression and exploitation and called for its abolition.Anarcho-capitalists (Murray Rothbard) simply hijacked anarchist idea, while ignoring its roots. Because of the historically anti-capitalist nature of much of anarchist thought, the status of anarcho-capitalism within anarchism is disputed particularly by communist-anarchists; ironically they try to protect their intellectual property. How you manage to fit Ayn Rand into this bunch of lunatics is beyond my comprehension.

Both...

Jameson's picture

Mario's voice seems more velvety to me.

I might be tonally-challenged, Maestro Perigo, but I know the difference between Bach and Schubert. I was applying a more 'Catholic' interpretation to what constituted kicking Objectivism's ass in the aesthetic department. Smiling

Mario's version ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... of which?!

Bach/Gounod or Schubert?

Since *you* can't tell the difference, how am I supposed to know?? Smiling

I'm happy to expand on this, for anyone genuinely musically curious. Just ask, and ye shall receive. Smiling

What I mean is...

Jameson's picture

both are examples of Catholicism kicking Objectivist ass... no?

BTW I do prefer Mario's version: smoother to my club ear. Smiling

How so??

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Splitting hairs?? The Bach/Gounod and the Schubert are two entirely different compositions, albeit both glorious and beyond the musical comprehension of the headbangers like Joe and Billy. Making that distinction is not splitting hairs, it's simply acknowledging reality. As it happens, Mario's version of the Bach-Gounod is even better than Anna's, in part because he remembers that the 'h' in Latin is silent. But the point on this thread is that his performance of the Schubert is, as Lady Slapper has just discovered, the work of a god. When you, too, wake up to this, Glenn, your ass won't be safe. Evil

Splitting hairs aren't we?

Jameson's picture

Smiling

Glenn, you stupid boy

Lindsay Perigo's picture

That's a different Ave Maria, the Bach-Gounod—can't you tell?!—about which I already posted here months ago, to the usual indifference of the headbangers. But yes, it's glorious beyond words, as I already said. Anna Moffo is my absolute favourite soprano. I interviewed her, too. And the interview is available right here on SOLO. Did you get that?? Smiling

Well that's lucky then...

Jameson's picture

How does this chick measure up...?

Thank you Lord Whopper Flopper!

Olivia's picture

This version tops all others in my book.

The cathedral acoustics are hair raising! Befitting of that god-like voice.
I think this piece is the test of possessing a soul or not.

"Do not go gentle into that good night
Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

Ha-ha!

Jameson's picture

Yeah, I should stick to my Cocteau Twins...

Nah

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Kiri's a bore. Keep with the programme, dear tone-deaf Glenn. Damn thing won't play anyway! Smiling

While we're at it...

Jameson's picture

Here's Kiri's version - truly celestial, but I think not as sweet as Mario's:

Incidentally ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Where Mario scores over The Priests:

He doesn't sing as if to a metronome, where the timing has the predictable precision of a Nazi goose-step.

And just listen to his gliding over the word "plena," as in "Maria, gratia plena." Anal-retentive critics used to slate him for just that sort of thing, but who can deny its beauty, apart from Joe and Billy and headbangers generally? Eye

Glad ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... you finally caught up with this, Lady Slapper. I note there are 205 guests online right now. You and Mario are a formidable combo!! Eye

Re: Lanza's Ave Maria...

Olivia's picture

Here's the You tube version embedded, which was quicker to download for me.

Unbelievably stunning, loaded with reverence and tenderness. Sweet as sweet can be.

"Do not go gentle into that good night
Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

Joe

Lindsay Perigo's picture

And I harbor no doubts about you, Scott...or Linz.

I know not to what you allude. Try "say what you mean."

Meanwhile, Catholicism continues to beat Objectivism's ass.

No Doubt

Jmaurone's picture

And I harbor no doubts about you, Scott...or Linz. 

..A SHOW OF HANDS: A Cautionary Tale of Heroes in Exile...

I think that's a good idea ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... to ignore Billy for a bit, much and all as we'll miss the gladiatorial entertainment. I've unmoderated him and hope he can summon the good grace not to threaten anyone with punching his fucking lights out.

I think you were a bit hard on Joe. At his best, which is most of the time, he's brilliant. He's not at his best when the subject is music, or Linz. He's at his worst when the subject is both. Eye

Your house, your rules.

atlascott's picture

I would just like to clarify that I didn't ask for Billy to be moderated and it doesn't matter to me whether he is or is not.

This is just ugly. I am going to lay off of him and his sidekick for awhile, if I can avoid being goaded.

I'm sorry I let this thread head down this road, too.

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

Scott

Lindsay Perigo's picture

It's the Headbangers' Support Group! Eye

Just so we're clear - regardless of who has said what in the past, threats like "I'll punch your fucking lights out" and "You'll pay for your statements in blood" are out from now on. Billy is under moderation. He's submitted two posts while moderated, both of which I've let through, for what little they were worth. Can't say fairer than that. In fact, I'll lift the moderation now as long as it's understood that it'll go straight back on if there's any more of that. I can't do fairer than that.

How about...

atlascott's picture

How about the part where you tell us that this culture deserves you at your worst? How about your generally shitty, angry attitude? Snide, sniping, garbage?

All out of frustration for the life you have chosen for yourself.

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

For starters

atlascott's picture

I know that your question is rhetorical, what with your head being so far up Billy's ass and all.

But I'll answer, anyway.

...and JUST for starters, how about the difference between an abstract statement in support of a friend and a threat of violence in response to a disagreement, directly from the threatener to the threatened?

The substitution of violence for cognition.

If there was any doubt about you, Joe, there is not now.

Go back to some of the SOLOPassion threads, where I was aping Billy's "style" to show how utterly ridiculous his behavior is, and clarify beyond all doubt that you cannot think at all.

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

2 Examples

Jmaurone's picture

http://rebirthofreason.com/Forum/ArticleDiscussions/1446.shtml

Post 8: "An occasional smack in the mouth is the exact corect prescription for a Pusbag."

and 

"What is infinitely more offensive than my turn of a salty phrase is Hudgins' conduct here, and the jackals-upon-the-lion pounce Linz's detractors perpetrated here. If we were all in the same room, bet your ass there'd be a real brawl if these fuckwits had the balls to say for real what they safely type in the interweb.

See, it can get messy and personal if you treat ideas seriously and not as passionless intellectual baubles. "

  (to which you replied:)

"That's a magnificent roar ya got there, Big Boy!

 

....A SHOW OF HANDS: A Cautionary Tale of Heroes in Exile....

The difference is ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I am unaware of threats of violence made by Scott.

Would someone care to explain...

Jmaurone's picture

 The difference between Beck's threats and the ones made by Scott in the past?  

...A SHOW OF HANDS: A Cautionary Tale of Heroes in Exile...

Bullshit

Billy Beck's picture

"His sense of life explains why he has made the decisions for himself that he has, but he evidently blames others for his decisions, rather than accepting his personal responsibility for the consequences of his choices."
Show your work, De Salvo. List these decisions that you know about among the countless ones that you don't know, and "explain" them by way of what you know of my "sense of life". There are holes in your knowledge of what you're talking about so profound that they actually comprise the greatest part of it by far, but I'll leave you to that much of your audacity.

Then, show all the nice kiddies where I "blames others".

You're just parading around under Perigo's skirts now, and you're full of shit.

Two Schools

atlascott's picture

At its most basic, I have always observed that there are fundamentally two schools of Anarchism. The first are anti-intellectual emotionalists who believe that the universe has no meaning or purpose, so entropy and chaos and anarchy is man's fate--and, I guess, ~proper~ for man. In other words, nihilism. The second are the "intellectual" anarchists whose libertarian-influenced subgroup's underpinnings include Rand, but generally, whose primary failings are a problem with being concrete-bound and rationalistic.

There are compelling ~reasons~ why he was always oblique in expressing his ideas, quick to threaten and ridicule, cryptic. It has nothing to do with being profound, or having reverence for the truth. His sense of life explains why he has made the decisions for himself that he has, but he evidently blames others for his decisions, rather than accepting his personal responsibility for the consequences of his choices.

Certain adherents of the latter form of anarchy take a bit of time to display that they are every bit the nihilists as adherents of the first type. A slightly different flavor, but that's about it.

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

Don't apologize!

Robert's picture

"I don't like what you are saying: Prepare to die!" is not an argument. It is the action of a drooling beast.

And this from someone who profess a belief in the non initiation of force principle. No doubt I'll be added to Beck's hit list for daring to comment.

What is becoming of Anarchists today! Sheesh!

Shut Up, Perigo

Billy Beck's picture

Just do what you do. Apologies are for creeps.

mvardoulis

Leonid's picture

" a musical Russkie not a musical Randian!" These two don't contradict each other. Remember, Rand was originaly from Russia as well.

beats me

Matty Orchard's picture

Matty can't play it.

Kasper's picture

Matty can't play it.

Romantic Music...

Matty Orchard's picture

 

Leonid mentioned...

mvardoulis's picture

...two of my favorite classical pieces I 'discovered' in the same sentence:

"3rd piano concerto by Rachmaninov or 1st by Tchaykovski." I thought liking those pieces made me a musical Russkie not a musical Randian! Smiling

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.