|
Post by laughter on Nov 7, 2019 19:20:43 GMT -5
Oh yeah, I got into the "what is art" thingy long before I knew what non-duality was all about. That was one of my first major koans that I resolved in a more logical way than usual. LOL. ,, AAR my daughter had tons of fun selecting the garbage that eventually became the talk of the Rotary Club! Great story ZD. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 7, 2019 19:30:10 GMT -5
Ah yes, movies, now you're speaking my dialect. I've actually been to a few Russian plays but my interest in literature is far too shallow and dilatory beyond Shakespeare and sci-fi to ever sit through a read of a Russian novel. The search for meaning will of course never end, but, in so far as we can conceive of the "Western Mind", the world sure did get alot smaller after the inventions of the steam engine and the telephone. Fight Club and The Matrix (1 .. ) certainly are an interesting cultural mile marker. The "counter-culture" that emerged after WW II was certainly foundational to that, the collapse of the material assumption happened in the 1920's, and the lines of thought that led up to that trace back to the series of scientists and philosophers that stretch back to Galileo and before. Certainly both the Matrix and the Fight Club had many precedents, too... The Matrix is Plato's Cave or Descartes' evil demon. Fight Club is Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Definitely true that chaos and uncertainty are nothing new. I do wonder what the changes in media consumption do. The move from orality to literature, I'm sure, changed something about the collective psyche, as did the advent of radio, and then TV. And certainly the Internet and smart phones are doing something somewhat different to the way we perceive the world and each other. But just what that is is hard to say. What I notice is a sort of urbane social fluidity amongst the educated that started with the early boomers back in the '60's and kept progressing .. a sort of easy, hail-fellow-well-met, and a sophisticated tolerance in terms of various cultural facets like sexuality, spirituality and race. It seems to me related to the velocity of information, and, in the last 20 years, a sort of transparency as the old means of privacy were invaded by the internet. This would be the positive side of the rapid pace of superficial change, while the underside would be an amplification of the natural point of existential anxiety applicable to any and all people-peeps. This is what I perceive as the impetus of the interest in this hyperrealistic work. It's seeking value in the solid, the sure, and the objective. Seems to me a very natural present trend given the historical prologue.
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Nov 8, 2019 8:41:00 GMT -5
Certainly both the Matrix and the Fight Club had many precedents, too... The Matrix is Plato's Cave or Descartes' evil demon. Fight Club is Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Definitely true that chaos and uncertainty are nothing new. I do wonder what the changes in media consumption do. The move from orality to literature, I'm sure, changed something about the collective psyche, as did the advent of radio, and then TV. And certainly the Internet and smart phones are doing something somewhat different to the way we perceive the world and each other. But just what that is is hard to say. What I notice is a sort of urbane social fluidity amongst the educated that started with the early boomers back in the '60's and kept progressing .. a sort of easy, hail-fellow-well-met, and a sophisticated tolerance in terms of various cultural facets like sexuality, spirituality and race. It seems to me related to the velocity of information, and, in the last 20 years, a sort of transparency as the old means of privacy were invaded by the internet. This would be the positive side of the rapid pace of superficial change, while the underside would be an amplification of the natural point of existential anxiety applicable to any and all people-peeps. This is what I perceive as the impetus of the interest in this hyperrealistic work. It's seeking value in the solid, the sure, and the objective. Seems to me a very natural present trend given the historical prologue. Ah, interesting thought. So what then do you make of the explosive rise in popularity the last 20 years of fantasy in mass media -- Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones, and Marvel & DC movies and TV shows and so on?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 8, 2019 16:33:07 GMT -5
What I notice is a sort of urbane social fluidity amongst the educated that started with the early boomers back in the '60's and kept progressing .. a sort of easy, hail-fellow-well-met, and a sophisticated tolerance in terms of various cultural facets like sexuality, spirituality and race. It seems to me related to the velocity of information, and, in the last 20 years, a sort of transparency as the old means of privacy were invaded by the internet. This would be the positive side of the rapid pace of superficial change, while the underside would be an amplification of the natural point of existential anxiety applicable to any and all people-peeps. This is what I perceive as the impetus of the interest in this hyperrealistic work. It's seeking value in the solid, the sure, and the objective. Seems to me a very natural present trend given the historical prologue. Ah, interesting thought. So what then do you make of the explosive rise in popularity the last 20 years of fantasy in mass media -- Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones, and Marvel & DC movies and TV shows and so on? Different media, different analysis and conclusory meme. It's an interesting and complex set of cycles, and I think I can make a case for a pattern by sampling by decade. Say: "Gone With the Wind", "Casablanca", "It's a Wonderful Life", "All About Eve", Any John Wayne movie .. And in the 1950's there was an interesting back-to-back for best picture: "From Here to Eternity" (1954) and "On the Waterfront" (1955). Up until this point, the stories were all relatively linear and straight forward. They had clear beginnings, middles and ends, clear protagonists, clear antagonists. Not to say there wasn't complication and nuance. There were plenty of grey characters prior to 1956, plenty of stories with an ambiguous sense of right and wrong, and, I'm sure if I bothered to do the research, I could unearth counter-examples that involved nonlinear stories with creative, unexpected, and layered structures to them. But sometime over this period, from '55 through to the early 70's, I could argue for a meme of the death of the hero, and the complete loss of moral center, leading to a deprivation of any sort of conventional satisfaction on the part of the audience. And it wasn't only that the hero loses or is killed - that's just, in part, the Christ archetype, in part a sort of reverse psychology - but rather, what I perceive is an absence of the heroic form, and when it did appear, it appeared in the form of the anti-hero, like, say, in "High Plains Drifter". By the time we get to the "Midnight Cowboy", the hero is not only long dead and buried out on the high chaparral, but his zombie corpse has been dressed up in cheap lingerie and kicked around the street for a few laps. The epitome of this formless form, embodying a sort of nihilism, would have to be "No Country for Old Men". ( ) Now, writing about the underlying real-world events that influenced this trend, and how they did that, would triple the length of this wall. So, in the interest of some sort of half-hearted attempt at brevity, I'd say that the reason comic books put asses in seats is because they allow the story teller to revive the traditional elements of linear plot, protagonist, antagonist and morally satisfying conclusion by avoiding real-life cultural triggers. Like, say, the cowboy. And, of course, the cycles of life are inevitable, so, 30 years into the trend, we get this subreddit .. "Thanos did nothing wrong". Haven't seen "The Joker" yet, so please no spoilers! But I'm really looking forward to it. Seems to me an even deeper dive into the nuance of ambiguity. Not to say I don't miss the hero's to some degree. My favorite of all time is Lenny, from "Momento". My theory is that Joey Pants really was John G.
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Nov 9, 2019 11:19:07 GMT -5
Ah, interesting thought. So what then do you make of the explosive rise in popularity the last 20 years of fantasy in mass media -- Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones, and Marvel & DC movies and TV shows and so on? Different media, different analysis and conclusory meme. It's an interesting and complex set of cycles, and I think I can make a case for a pattern by sampling by decade. Say: "Gone With the Wind", "Casablanca", "It's a Wonderful Life", "All About Eve", Any John Wayne movie .. And in the 1950's there was an interesting back-to-back for best picture: "From Here to Eternity" (1954) and "On the Waterfront" (1955). Up until this point, the stories were all relatively linear and straight forward. They had clear beginnings, middles and ends, clear protagonists, clear antagonists. Not to say there wasn't complication and nuance. There were plenty of grey characters prior to 1956, plenty of stories with an ambiguous sense of right and wrong, and, I'm sure if I bothered to do the research, I could unearth counter-examples that involved nonlinear stories with creative, unexpected, and layered structures to them. But sometime over this period, from '55 through to the early 70's, I could argue for a meme of the death of the hero, and the complete loss of moral center, leading to a deprivation of any sort of conventional satisfaction on the part of the audience. And it wasn't only that the hero loses or is killed - that's just, in part, the Christ archetype, in part a sort of reverse psychology - but rather, what I perceive is an absence of the heroic form, and when it did appear, it appeared in the form of the anti-hero, like, say, in "High Plains Drifter". By the time we get to the "Midnight Cowboy", the hero is not only long dead and buried out on the high chaparral, but his zombie corpse has been dressed up in cheap lingerie and kicked around the street for a few laps. The epitome of this formless form, embodying a sort of nihilism, would have to be "No Country for Old Men". ( ) Now, writing about the underlying real-world events that influenced this trend, and how they did that, would triple the length of this wall. So, in the interest of some sort of half-hearted attempt at brevity, I'd say that the reason comic books put asses in seats is because they allow the story teller to revive the traditional elements of linear plot, protagonist, antagonist and morally satisfying conclusion by avoiding real-life cultural triggers. Like, say, the cowboy. And, of course, the cycles of life are inevitable, so, 30 years into the trend, we get this subreddit .. "Thanos did nothing wrong". Haven't seen "The Joker" yet, so please no spoilers! But I'm really looking forward to it. Seems to me an even deeper dive into the nuance of ambiguity. Not to say I don't miss the hero's to some degree. My favorite of all time is Lenny, from "Momento". My theory is that Joey Pants really was John G. I love Memento! I feel like there's a dissertation in film theory here longing to be fleshed out
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 9, 2019 18:59:41 GMT -5
Different media, different analysis and conclusory meme. It's an interesting and complex set of cycles, and I think I can make a case for a pattern by sampling by decade. Say: "Gone With the Wind", "Casablanca", "It's a Wonderful Life", "All About Eve", Any John Wayne movie .. And in the 1950's there was an interesting back-to-back for best picture: "From Here to Eternity" (1954) and "On the Waterfront" (1955). Up until this point, the stories were all relatively linear and straight forward. They had clear beginnings, middles and ends, clear protagonists, clear antagonists. Not to say there wasn't complication and nuance. There were plenty of grey characters prior to 1956, plenty of stories with an ambiguous sense of right and wrong, and, I'm sure if I bothered to do the research, I could unearth counter-examples that involved nonlinear stories with creative, unexpected, and layered structures to them. But sometime over this period, from '55 through to the early 70's, I could argue for a meme of the death of the hero, and the complete loss of moral center, leading to a deprivation of any sort of conventional satisfaction on the part of the audience. And it wasn't only that the hero loses or is killed - that's just, in part, the Christ archetype, in part a sort of reverse psychology - but rather, what I perceive is an absence of the heroic form, and when it did appear, it appeared in the form of the anti-hero, like, say, in "High Plains Drifter". By the time we get to the "Midnight Cowboy", the hero is not only long dead and buried out on the high chaparral, but his zombie corpse has been dressed up in cheap lingerie and kicked around the street for a few laps. The epitome of this formless form, embodying a sort of nihilism, would have to be "No Country for Old Men". ( ) Now, writing about the underlying real-world events that influenced this trend, and how they did that, would triple the length of this wall. So, in the interest of some sort of half-hearted attempt at brevity, I'd say that the reason comic books put asses in seats is because they allow the story teller to revive the traditional elements of linear plot, protagonist, antagonist and morally satisfying conclusion by avoiding real-life cultural triggers. Like, say, the cowboy. And, of course, the cycles of life are inevitable, so, 30 years into the trend, we get this subreddit .. "Thanos did nothing wrong". Haven't seen "The Joker" yet, so please no spoilers! But I'm really looking forward to it. Seems to me an even deeper dive into the nuance of ambiguity. Not to say I don't miss the hero's to some degree. My favorite of all time is Lenny, from "Momento". My theory is that Joey Pants really was John G. I love Memento! I feel like there's a dissertation in film theory here longing to be fleshed out
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Nov 13, 2019 9:22:18 GMT -5
Maya is creating a reality close enough to this 3D experience as to "fool" consciousness into accepting it as the new reality, like a virus. This is the equivalent of moving into a simulation within a simulation, and further into delusion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2019 10:06:02 GMT -5
Maya is creating a reality close enough to this 3D experience as to "fool" consciousness into accepting it as the new reality, like a virus. This is the equivalent of moving into a simulation within a simulation, and further into delusion.
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Nov 13, 2019 10:52:56 GMT -5
Care to elaborate?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2019 11:36:14 GMT -5
No. I think it's a perfect reply to your fears.
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Nov 13, 2019 12:40:20 GMT -5
No fear here.
No seeing things inverted either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2019 12:55:55 GMT -5
No fear here. No seeing things inverted either. What would you have said if I had said it was 'a perfect reply to your post?'
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Nov 13, 2019 13:16:32 GMT -5
Everything is perfect.
You didn't; you assumed i was fearful, and then insinuated that i needed adjustment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2019 14:20:59 GMT -5
Everything is perfect. You didn't; you assumed i was fearful, and then insinuated that i needed adjustment. Well, if we leave out any personal insinuations as it's obviously a sensitive issue for you. Does the gif really need any elaboration?
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Nov 13, 2019 14:46:40 GMT -5
Well the gif was a personal insinuation, wasn't it? i was correcting that insinuation. i am not fearful and i see things as they are.
Just trying to give a heads up about what's coming down the pipe.
|
|