Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
Perhaps what you mean by "a search for authenticity" is what I mean when I say the medium is "warmer" and "less sterile". That being said I can't tell you about the musical taste of 1980s cohorts except for my Husband and my Sister. My husband (1982) prefers older music, the older the better. In fact for hims Pop doesn't get good until the musician has been dead at least 10 years. My sister on the other hand (1984) will listen to just about any schlock that comes on the radio. She doesn't so much have a certain taste but a complete lack of it.
Myself I still gravitate toward the Alternative and Grunge of the 1990s but find that I do like a lot of music from before then. Particularly Jazz and Blues. I can't stand the Beatles though. For me it is like Music went into a black hole from 1964 to 1977.
Posts: 274
Threads: 30
Joined: Mar 2019
(05-04-2019, 07:11 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Perhaps what you mean by "a search for authenticity" is what I mean when I say the medium is "warmer" and "less sterile". That being said I can't tell you about the musical taste of 1980s cohorts except for my Husband and my Sister. My husband (1982) prefers older music, the older the better. In fact for hims Pop doesn't get good until the musician has been dead at least 10 years. My sister on the other hand (1984) will listen to just about any schlock that comes on the radio. She doesn't so much have a certain taste but a complete lack of it.
Myself I still gravitate toward the Alternative and Grunge of the 1990s but find that I do like a lot of music from before then. Particularly Jazz and Blues. I can't stand the Beatles though. For me it is like Music went into a black hole from 1964 to 1977.
Yeah it kind of seems to be a mixed bag between people who let the radio dictate their taste and people with who search for their own. I see a lot of the attitude that say "I can listen to any music I want in this decade. Why do I need to be born in a certain time or country to enjoy it?". Music sales have been down including digital sales.
Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
Well in my case my attraction to 1990s Grunge and Alternative is that it is the music of my youth. Also the Punk rock from that era and the 1980s and to lesser extent 1970s.
That being said, I also listen to Early Jazz and Ragtime (hence why I mention Jelly Roll Morton--who died in 1941 and was a Lost which might explain why his music resonates with me to a degree), Swing and other things. I'm very eclectic in my tastes.
As to music sales...well new music all sounds the same. Older music can be reproduced for free or nearly free. Why buy it when you can pirate it?
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
05-04-2019, 11:03 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2019, 11:04 PM by Eric the Green.)
(05-04-2019, 01:26 AM)TheNomad Wrote: (05-04-2019, 12:15 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Strictly speaking, slavery was more an institution than a technology
I don't think I agree. Technology is basically a resource. A resource harnessed by someone or a thing (a corp) for financial gain.
Slave = the modern equivalent of an employee?
Think about it first. The most efficient way to use the TECH in the scenario is to own human beings to do work for you AND NOT PAY THEM.
I dont think anyone can really say that isnt the most effective way to use HUMAN LABOR as TECH.
So, if you have a TECH available to you that is not available to others, that is a clear advantage in the capitalistic ideology. ANY tech. If someone has access to fresh water when their competitor does not, it's an advantage. Just being random there. To the basest level, the "effort" or ......... business .......... cannot thrive above its competitors if RESOURCES are not equal.
Confederacy was based on the idea they had the resources of HUMAN BEINGS on their farms and in their businesses who did work for them without pay. While contrast that to other "competitors in business" who did not have that same resource (they did not/chose not to have human beings work without pay).
Destroy the advantage (the TECH) and you have destroyed the Confederacy.
You must be willing to see this in the light of capitalism, business and TECHNOLOGY. When a company develops a new microchip, they have an advantage over all other competitors. They thrive in the marketplace. Until other corps are able (by law) to use and make those microchips themselves to even the playing field.
Since I am interested in understanding how the (civil war 4T??) compares to the current one NOW (because I do not think our 4T is like the WWII era Turning)....... how do I compare the TECH and the idea the Confederacy was laid waste when a huge "indictment" and MORAL CONDEMNATION was made of a thing which gave an advantage in our civilization that now longer exists.
I know, that's a bit much bit I run on 14 cylinders.
WHAT in the CW Turning is like ours now?
I am looking at the Civil War Era being like ours.......... but maybe without the physical war. An ideological one, grand and maybe as large in some ways as some of the "reconstruction" of the CW period. What are we facing now that is like that time? What are going to be the emerging morals that change the landscape of our America? What are some of the HUGE referendums coming for us now that will fundamentally alter our civilization?
Thoughtful questions.
Ours is like the CW turning in obvious ways; we are largely split between two factions identified by colors. The liberal faction now as then is represented by blue, and the conservative faction was gray then and red now. The colors this time are based on network TV election day maps as the states' vote is determined, established by the time of the 2000 election, and also established in language at that time. Blue and gray were different soldier uniforms in the early years of the war. But the states involved are substantially the same, with the addition of new states in the west. The war was preceded by a long period of increasing tension, polarization, failed compromises and some severely-incompetent presidents (Fillmore, Pierce, Buchanan/W. Bush and Trump). The 4th turnings were preceded by wars of conquest by the USA in 1846 and 2003, which increased the polarization of the country, and were precipitated by a worldwide depression in 1846-48 and 2008-2010. The depression and crop failures abroad led to greatly-increased immigration to the USA and elsewhere, with resulting controversy and fear of foreigners in the USA in both periods. Despite the depression, advances in technology helped launch an economic boom in the following years, especially on the Blue side.
The Yankees of the North (the Blues) already had an advantage over the South of Dixie (the Grays), because the former was an emerging industrial society and the latter was an aristocratic feudal state based on agriculture. Slavery was the only way the South could keep up with the North's prosperity at all, and so slavery was cranked up in the years leading up to the civil war. Defeat meant the decline of slave labor and the gradual increase of industry in the South over many decades.
Today, the Blues retain the advantage, but now it has high tech, while the Reds (South, mostly-southern Rust Belt and plains, etc.) are partly still agriculture-based and partly based on the same industries that boomed after 1850 but are now in decline.
You can say that the previous civil war was a battle between the incipient industrial Orange Meme (a concept of Spiral Dynamics of Integral Philosophy, representing Achievement, classical liberal values and rationalism) and the Blue Meme (traditional agriculture-based medieval feudal authoritarian meme). Today's cold civil war is between the Green and Lemon-colored Memes (the partly-socialist industrial and high tech/ecological memes) against the Orange (now conceived almost exclusively as free-market libertarian) and Blue (agricultural and now conceived largely as the Religious Right and xenophobic). Obviously, the colors of these symbols are different.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(05-04-2019, 07:16 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote: (05-04-2019, 07:11 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Perhaps what you mean by "a search for authenticity" is what I mean when I say the medium is "warmer" and "less sterile". That being said I can't tell you about the musical taste of 1980s cohorts except for my Husband and my Sister. My husband (1982) prefers older music, the older the better. In fact for hims Pop doesn't get good until the musician has been dead at least 10 years. My sister on the other hand (1984) will listen to just about any schlock that comes on the radio. She doesn't so much have a certain taste but a complete lack of it.
Myself I still gravitate toward the Alternative and Grunge of the 1990s but find that I do like a lot of music from before then. Particularly Jazz and Blues. I can't stand the Beatles though. For me it is like Music went into a black hole from 1964 to 1977.
Yeah it kind of seems to be a mixed bag between people who let the radio dictate their taste and people with who search for their own. I see a lot of the attitude that say "I can listen to any music I want in this decade. Why do I need to be born in a certain time or country to enjoy it?". Music sales have been down including digital sales.
Ah, the golden age of rock, 1964 to 1977. The Dark Age of Metal, Grunge and core-punk rock ever since. Yeah, seek out your own; all times and places are available to us, and that's what distinguishes our age. If you want to explore the golden age of rock, try this list:
http://philosopherswheel.com/ericrock.html
Posts: 4,336
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2016
(05-04-2019, 07:11 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Myself I still gravitate toward the Alternative and Grunge of the 1990s but find that I do like a lot of music from before then. Particularly Jazz and Blues. I can't stand the Beatles though. For me it is like Music went into a black hole from 1964 to 1977.
You have the right to your taste in music. It is personal, after all. But trashing what has been considered a golden age in music is less about the music than it is about you.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
(05-05-2019, 03:01 PM)David Horn Wrote: (05-04-2019, 07:11 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Myself I still gravitate toward the Alternative and Grunge of the 1990s but find that I do like a lot of music from before then. Particularly Jazz and Blues. I can't stand the Beatles though. For me it is like Music went into a black hole from 1964 to 1977.
You have the right to your taste in music. It is personal, after all. But trashing what has been considered a golden age in music is less about the music than it is about you.
You're right. It says I'm not a delusional Boomer who likes the smell of his own farts. As for Musical Golden Ages, the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s are far superior to anything produced in the last 2T.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
Yes, I thought disco was horrible, and that New Age was empty. Popular musicians, except the comparatively old ones, quit trying to give any semblance of meaning or purpose to their songs. Even if the music was jarring, it was blatantly commercial.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 4,336
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2016
(05-05-2019, 05:43 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: (05-05-2019, 03:01 PM)David Horn Wrote: (05-04-2019, 07:11 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Myself I still gravitate toward the Alternative and Grunge of the 1990s but find that I do like a lot of music from before then. Particularly Jazz and Blues. I can't stand the Beatles though. For me it is like Music went into a black hole from 1964 to 1977.
You have the right to your taste in music. It is personal, after all. But trashing what has been considered a golden age in music is less about the music than it is about you.
You're right. It says I'm not a delusional Boomer who likes the smell of his own farts. As for Musical Golden Ages, the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s are far superior to anything produced in the last 2T.
My father (born 1914) was a jazz musician, so you don't have to sell me on that. But let's be honest, musicians like James Johnson or Bix Beiderbecke are rare in every era. Fats Wallers don't grow in trees either. But musical taste doesn't define musical talent. The Beatles were great for being a really great band: tight, innovative with great internal cross pollination.
BTW, the greatest year in jazz is considered to be 1959, when Miles Davis, Ornette Coleman, John Colerain, Dave Brubeck, Bill Evans, Charlie Mingus and Duke Ellington (among others) released great albums that defined new directions in jazz -- most unique to themselves at the time, but copied by many later.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
(05-06-2019, 09:29 AM)David Horn Wrote: The Beatles were great for being a really great band: tight, innovative with great internal cross pollination.
That is a matter of opinion. I personally don't think that they were that great or that innovative. Rock N Roll entered a dark age the day Buddy Holly died and didn't emerge until the Remones came on the scene.
Quote:BTW, the greatest year in jazz is considered to be 1959, when Miles Davis, Ornette Coleman, John Colerain, Dave Brubeck, Bill Evans, Charlie Mingus and Duke Ellington (among others) released great albums that defined new directions in jazz -- most unique to themselves at the time, but copied by many later.
I'd agree. I'd also point out that by and large their music wasn't geared toward Boomers either.
Unlike Boomers other generations are not enamored with the odor of their own flatulence. A great deal of the Boomers I know love the Beatles because at first they pissed off their parents for being noise. These days they mostly use them to piss off their children.
Posts: 469
Threads: 2
Joined: Dec 2017
05-06-2019, 06:58 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-06-2019, 07:06 PM by Tim Randal Walker.)
Redoing a few of the terms:
1. Crisis of 2020
2. weak 1T
3. Awkening-Apollo type
4. unraveling
5. Crisis of 2100
6. High
7. Awakening-Dionysus type. (Pepperland finally returns in the 22nd century.)
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
Pepperland will return in the next 2T; awakenings are all pretty much alike, even if there is some variation and a double rhythm.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
05-06-2019, 10:13 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-06-2019, 10:20 PM by Eric the Green.)
(05-05-2019, 06:56 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Yes, I thought disco was horrible, and that New Age was empty. Popular musicians, except the comparatively old ones, quit trying to give any semblance of meaning or purpose to their songs. Even if the music was jarring, it was blatantly commercial.
That is true about almost all pop and alternative rock genres, with relatively rare exceptions, after 1984 or so. But pop music has usually had a good deal of commercial fluff and puff, in all eras. I admit at least it was less likely to be blatantly horrible in the old days, the 20s through the mid 40s. But rock music (and pop in general as a result) reached its heights in the 60s and early 70s for sure, but that doesn't mean it was all great by any means. The greatest pop artists were late Silents, and Silent is an example of the Artist archetype after all. Jazz is a bit of a different category. I don't especially care for it, but that's just my taste. It definitely has influenced the creativity of many fine pop and new age artists, as well as established an artistic tradition.
You have to look on the fringes of mainstream society for good music today, and New Age is one area where you can find it-- on the fringes of it, and not in the most popular kinds of New Age music.
Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
(05-06-2019, 06:58 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: Redoing a few of the terms:
1. Crisis of 2020
2. weak 1T
3. Awkening-Apollo type
4. unraveling
5. Crisis of 2100
6. High
7. Awakening-Dionysus type. (Pepperland finally returns in the 22nd century.)
I'd argue that Pepperland won't return. Did Trancendentalism return? No. The Awakening after the Crisis of 2100 will be Dionysus type certainly but it won't be Pepperland. Pepperland is already spent.
Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
Tara there is no accounting for taste, or lack thereof. See my comments about my sister's complete lack of taste.
My lack of enthusiasm for the Beatles goes back almost 40 years.
Posts: 384
Threads: 48
Joined: May 2018
can someone please move this thread to the off-topic/trash bin? why cant ppl who begin threads cancel them when they go into completely unrelated territory according to the OP and title of the thread?
that should not be allowed.
wtf does beatles and justin beeber have to do w a frakkin skipped archetype?
Posts: 274
Threads: 30
Joined: Mar 2019
(05-09-2019, 07:24 PM)TheNomad Wrote: can someone please move this thread to the off-topic/trash bin? why cant ppl who begin threads cancel them when they go into completely unrelated territory according to the OP and title of the thread?
that should not be allowed.
wtf does beatles and justin beeber have to do w a frakkin skipped archetype?
And where is your evidence Millennials were told "You're gonna survive a school shooting?"
Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
(05-09-2019, 07:24 PM)TheNomad Wrote: can someone please move this thread to the off-topic/trash bin? why cant ppl who begin threads cancel them when they go into completely unrelated territory according to the OP and title of the thread?
that should not be allowed.
wtf does beatles and justin beeber have to do w a frakkin skipped archetype?
Dude you've been on this forum for forever and the old one before then. Since when did a thread ever stay on topic? 
Posts: 384
Threads: 48
Joined: May 2018
05-10-2019, 01:38 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-10-2019, 01:43 AM by TheNomad.)
(05-09-2019, 09:14 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: (05-09-2019, 07:24 PM)TheNomad Wrote: can someone please move this thread to the off-topic/trash bin? why cant ppl who begin threads cancel them when they go into completely unrelated territory according to the OP and title of the thread?
that should not be allowed.
wtf does beatles and justin beeber have to do w a frakkin skipped archetype?
Dude you've been on this forum for forever and the old one before then. Since when did a thread ever stay on topic?
I have really been on here maybe a year or so. I dont know what old one you speak of. Just because ppl want to ramble and find/create new and imaginative ways shove their doctrines on everyone else, it should not be allowed.
I do see the pattern, you do not? The thread could be " PLANTING A GARDEN" and then in page 3 people will be complaining about entitlement programs, how Politician X is the devil and the idea positivity and god are all we need to survive the coming global holocaust(s) in the 4th Turning.
it aint right. disrespectful also. if a person starts a thread, they should have the ability to delete it for this reason IF they want to. I dont come to your house and take a dump on your welcome mat. And if I did, I would expect you'd want to get rid of that one right quick and replace it.
it's selfish and everyone all they most seem to know how to do here is find a way to EXPOUND their beliefs at others no matter what the topic is. Yes AT. Because ppl like u showing yourself in here conducting large conversations with others and then the next post you are saying "PERSON X never listened and they have a birth defect and an empty head" yet there you are blasting your beliefs at them like they was the side of a house you trying to power-wash. WHY do you even want to communicate with them? Because you aren't communicating anything except your doctrines AT everyone. No communication is exchanged, just billboards and bumper stickers, so no one learns anything, no one hears anyone.
It starts there. Take some responsibility.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
I expect people to expound their beliefs, as I do.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
|
