Posts by DCBCauchi
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Art about politics is not politics but art.
-
Muse: The Very Odd Future According to…, in reply to Rich Lock,
And, as other commentators have pointed out, possibly a distraction in this instance. The main point is the abuse of process (or not).
I totally agree. Love all the answers to Keir's question as to what can be done.
-
Muse: The Very Odd Future According to…, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
‘Sophisticated Bitch’.
Yup, another gold-digging uppity ho gets put in her place. Which might speak to the truth of where Public Enemy was at, but it sure ain’t no party song.
Would it kill any chance of a booking if I was a club owner? No, but I’d sure like to ask where the sisters fit into their sociopolitical scheme of things nowadays.
I don’t know the Public Enemy song you mention, but The Terminals have a song about a voodoo doll of an ex-girlfriend. ‘If I want to make you cry … I put a little drop of water in a little doll’s eye’ or something like that. Great song.
Shellac have a song – a ‘prayer to the one true god above’ – about the fervently wished for deaths of an ex-girlfriend and new boyfriend. It’s reasonably detailed about her but ‘him, just fucking kill him’. Then there’s Big Black.
Mark E Smith of The Fall wrote some songs about Brix E Smith and the ridiculous violinist she took up with after Mark. They are epically hilarious.
None of these things can be reduced to a formula, especially a formula with pre-approved tick boxes. Artistic objects, in any form, tend to be deceptively sophisticated complex things. The good ones anyway.
They have layers of meaning.
-
OnPoint: 3 News Exclusive Investigation…, in reply to the sprout,
people here and a few other places get it, but then we ain't most people. it never fails to amaze and dismay me just how naive most NZers are when it comes to the political interests of the msm. we must be one of the most gullible peoples on the globe in that respect :-(
I very much dislike this argument, if it's what I think it is.
People being uninterested in politics and the news media is not an indication that they are fools, gullible, deluded, or under some malign influence. It just means that politics and the news media has no relevance to them. It is not the be all and end all of everything.
-
I don’t want to put words in anyone’s mouth, but think it important not to be disingenuous.
I think the pro-censorship argument would be that ‘hate media’ (however it is defined), such as punks wearing Nazi symbols or hip hop songs about killing people, regardless of intention, gives succour and justification to those who genuinely think in such horrible ways.
I think this is a valid concern. However, I do not think banning things that might seem scary is the answer. People aren’t machines. And horrible people aren’t going to disappear by suppressing culture. Nor should people disappear. Not even horrible ones.
It’s not just a matter of changing the inputs to get different outputs, despite what theories might say. Just as making people say ‘chairperson’ didn’t eradicate sexism in meetings.
How is ‘hate media’ defined? Have I got the wrong end of the stick again?
-
Muse: The Very Odd Future According to…, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Those punk rock kids tended to grow up with their dads telling them the only good German is a dead German, which did not match the kids' experience of meeting Germans at all. Or so I have been told.
Even Kraftwerk dropped screaming electronic bombs on their fans. Before they became robots.
Keir's post is very quotable, especially the bit about natural justice. It really is outrageous. Even if the band were what they were made out to be. Everyone has the right to natural justice.
How basic is that? Natural justice.
-
We have hate media now?
I wonder whether that is why so many people find this musical genre so positive and empowering. Like punk before it and rock and roll before that. Back to the music the slaves would make round their fires of an evening. That came from somewhere too.
No doubt that was them oppressing themselves as well. If only they had known.
According to the social historians of art, it is extremely difficult to judge a cultural product if you are not a member of the culture that produced it. Something to do with the knowledge required to inform that judgement as I recall.
-
I am willing to bet money that, as with the advocates of arts policies (and too many similar cases), discretion will prove the better part of valour.
As soon as I heard about this, I thought 'Ye gods, someone's as foolish as those fanatics who took Judas Priest to court for some kid blowing his own face off.'
And it turned out to be Sandra Coney. I mean, really? She wrote a good report once, but now seems to want to destroy the memory of that. Gobsmacked.
So wrong. On so many levels.
-
No response from 3 yet? How odd.
-
OnPoint: 3 News Exclusive Investigation…, in reply to merc,
The voice of reason: 'And Act have been very stable'!