NationStates Jolt Archive

First of, the title. The term politically correct is not politically correct. CUlturally sensitive is.

Baa Baa Rainbow Sheep, The UK has gone mad,
Now we can't play conkers, and the children are all sad,
The teachers have no training to put plasters on a cut,
And you get fined for putting litter in a bin without a but.

Sorry for the rhyme but I decided to make it into something better.

Anymore stories? Anything about our whole world succumbing to the demon hordes of buracratic campaigners?

Please, help before we're drowned out!

A Policeman/Fireman/Milkman is now a Police/Fire/Milk Person, even when they are a man.

A Policeman/Fireman/Milkman is now a Police/Fire/Milk Person, even when they are a man.
Actually the proper terms are police officer, fire fighter and OBSOLETE. What the hell does it matter if that person is male or female?

I know what you mean. I'm an anarchist, but lately, I've been growing more disillusioned with egalitarianism. I'm all for equal opportunity and I don't support social class, but after finding out that it's apparently élitist to consider Beethoven a better musician than Britney Spears or Nelly, I'm starting to wonder if Nietzsche was right, after all.

but after finding out that it's apparently élitist to consider Beethoven a better musician than Britney Spears or Nelly, I'm starting to wonder if Nietzsche was right, after all.
But why would you be comparing these people to one another? Apples and bloody oranges! Certainly Beethoven is a worse rapper than Nelly, and Nelly is a worse hoochie-mama than Britney, and neither Nelly nor Britney are as long lived in terms of the fame of their music...can you see where I'm going with this?

Actually the proper terms are police officer, fire fighter and OBSOLETE. What the hell does it matter if that person is male or female?
lol :D

Well I still get woken up at 5 in the morning by the obselete.

lol :D

Well I still get woken up at 5 in the morning by the obselete.
And you don't ensure that he or she REMAINS obsolete for waking you at such an unholy hour? WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU!!!!???

But why would you be comparing these people to one another? Apples and bloody oranges! Certainly Beethoven is a worse rapper than Nelly, and Nelly is a worse hoochie-mama than Britney, and neither Nelly nor Britney are as long lived in terms of the fame of their music...can you see where I'm going with this?
How do you know that? Perhaps in 2, 300 years if you go to a classical concert they'll be singing "Hit me baby one more time".:D

How do you know that? Perhaps in 2, 300 years if you go to a classical concert they'll be singing "Hit me baby one more time".:D
But Beethoven, if still listened to by then, will STILL be older. Ha!

But why would you be comparing these people to one another? Apples and bloody oranges! Certainly Beethoven is a worse rapper than Nelly, and Nelly is a worse hoochie-mama than Britney, and neither Nelly nor Britney are as long lived in terms of the fame of their music...can you see where I'm going with this?

But Beethoven spent far more time and effort training and working on his work than either. That effort and talent should be recognized. I mean, Beethoven (and most other classical composers, for that matter) regularly composed works over 20 minutes long and even composed some over an hour long. How many songs by Nelly or Britney Spears are even 5 minutes long?

but after finding out that it's apparently élitist to consider Beethoven a better musician than Britney Spears or Nelly,

Nope. Just sensible. Beethoven pwns :D

I'm starting to wonder if Nietzsche was right, after all.

So you finally got around to reading him? :p

But Beethoven spent far more time and effort training and working on his work than either. That effort and talent should be recognized. I mean, Beethoven (and most other classical composers, for that matter) regularly composed works over 20 minutes long and even composed some over an hour long. How many songs by Nelly or Britney Spears are even 5 minutes long?
So...Deep Purple regularly played songs that ran in excess of 20 minutes...does that suddenly make them equal to Beethoven? :) We are talking about different genres. You can't really say who is the better musician, because we aren't even talking about the same kind of music. It would be like comparing an impressionist painter with a Mexican muralist...both forms have merit, but can not be directly compared to one another.

But Beethoven, if still listened to by then, will STILL be older. Ha!
If he's still remembered by then.

lol :D

Well I still get woken up at 5 in the morning by the obselete.

Obselete man showed up at my house around six. I will be leaving him a note advising him that the central committee has determined he no longer exists. ;)

But why would you be comparing these people to one another? Apples and bloody oranges! Certainly Beethoven is a worse rapper than Nelly, and Nelly is a worse hoochie-mama than Britney, and neither Nelly nor Britney are as long lived in terms of the fame of their music...can you see where I'm going with this?

Bah, you've obviously never heard Beethoven rap.

Obselete man showed up at my house around six. I will be leaving him a note advising him that the central committee has determined he no longer exists. ;)

Ahem, The Obselete Person thank you very much ;)

What makes politically correct politcally incorrect? Just curious.
The teachers have no training to put plasters on a cut,Not that I'm defending political correctness, but the reason is do with allergies, and not training.

So...Deep Purple regularly played songs that ran in excess of 20 minutes...does that suddenly make them equal to Beethoven? We are talking about different genres. You can't really say who is the better musician, because we aren't even talking about the same kind of music. It would be like comparing an impressionist painter with a Mexican muralist...both forms have merit, but can not be directly compared to one another.

Yes, you can compare them. If one artist spent years practicing and training and the other just picked up a paintbrush and started painting, I think we can safely say who would produce better art. To put it another way, would you claim scientifically tested medical treatments are no better than magic in treating illness?

Bah, you've obviously never heard Beethoven rap.
I'm Ludwig von, yes I'm the real Ludwig von
All you other Ludwig vons are just imitating
So won't the real Ludwig von please stand up,
please stand up, please stand up?

If he's still remembered by then.
That was covered by, "But Beethoven, IF STILL LISTENED TO"....;)

Yes, you can compare them. If one artist spent years practicing and training and the other just picked up a paintbrush and started painting, I think we can safely say who would produce better art. To put it another way, would you claim scientifically tested medical treatments are no better than magic in treating illness?
Don't try to tell me that years of study are necessarily going to create a better musician or artist. That simply isn't true. Many people study for years, and have nothing more than technical knowledge, but create nothing that inspires. Others pick up an instrument or a paint brush and create masterpieces. So no, you can not safely say who will produce better art, just because one artist has a degree, and the other doesn't. I'm amazed you would seriously suggest that...have you not met art/music students?

Ahem, The Obselete Person thank you very much ;)

Nope, he's a pretty old guy and I heard what he did when they retired his horse and cart. I'd hate to find out what he would do if they took being a man away from him. I'll opt for self preservation over goose stepping, culturally sensitive, right thinking, whiney little elitist bitch, any day. ;)

Don't try to tell me that years of study are necessarily going to create a better musician or artist. That simply isn't true. Many people study for years, and have nothing more than technical knowledge, but create nothing that inspires. Others pick up an instrument or a paint brush and create masterpieces. So no, you can not safely say who will produce better art, just because one artist has a degree, and the other doesn't. I'm amazed you would seriously suggest that...have you not met art/music students?

Maybe not, but all other things more or less equal, the artist with more training is going to do better than an artist without it. Surely you aren't suggesting that Nelly and Britney Spears have more raw talent than classical composers because that simply isn't true. Mozart already was creating masterpieces with relatively little training at a young age.

Maybe not, but all other things more or less equal, the artist with more training is going to do better than an artist without it.
There is no 'all things being more or less equal' when it comes to art. Talent is not something you can measure, nor is the response of someone else to a work, musical or otherwise. What you consider 'great art' may be garbage by my standards, and visa versa.


Surely you aren't suggesting that Nelly and Britney Spears have more raw talent than classical composers because that simply isn't true. I'm saying you can't compare them. Were they to attempt to compose classical music, they would no doubt harm us all with their final 'work'. Nonetheless, they aren't competing with Beethoven as classical artists. I'm not saying they are better, or worse, or equal to Beethoven, in much the same way as I would not say an apple is better, worse or equal to an orange. Just because they all fall under the incredibly broad category of 'music', does not mean they are the same thing.

Mozart already was creating masterpieces with relatively little training at a young age.My point exactly. Mozart had raw talent, and training is largely irrelevant to that. Training can not create talent. You, however, stated that a trained artist/musician is inherently going to be better than an untrained one. Not true. No guarantees.

I'm saying you can't compare them. Were they to attempt to compose classical music, they would no doubt harm us all with their final 'work'. Nonetheless, they aren't competing with Beethoven as classical artists. I'm not saying they are better, or worse, or equal to Beethoven, in much the same way as I would not say an apple is better, worse or equal to an orange. Just because they all fall under the incredibly broad category of 'music', does not mean they are the same thing.

Fine, as pop stars, they are ok, but as musicians, they aren't. It's like saying that a practitioner of magic may be no match for a doctor in curing illness, but he is better at it than other magic users. There are times when comparing apples to oranges is justified.

Fine, as pop stars, they are ok, but as musicians, they aren't. It's like saying that a practitioner of magic may be no match for a doctor in curing illness, but he is better at it than other magic users. There are times when comparing apples to oranges is justified.
This case is not one of them. Not until you adequately define 'musician' beyond 'someone who performs music', and then somehow create a set of criteria to actually compare genres that have nothing to do with one another. Let's choose a genre you may feel less animosity towards. Say, the Blues. Now tell me, how are you going to compare classical music to the Blues, and determine who is the better musician? Most likely, you will make that determination based solely on your personal taste, not on facts. Just admit that, move on, and realise you can't quantify art.

This case is not one of them. Not until you adequately define 'musician' beyond 'someone who performs music', and then somehow create a set of criteria to actually compare genres that have nothing to do with one another. Let's choose a genre you may feel less animosity towards. Say, the Blues. Now tell me, how are you going to compare classical music to the Blues, and determine who is the better musician? Most likely, you will make that determination based solely on your personal taste, not on facts. Just admit that, move on, and realise you can't quantify art.

Fine, you can't quantify talent, but you can at least roughly compare innovation, time spent learning and practicing, and so on. I mean, if I type out a random series of words and call it a poem, are you seriously going to consider it equally good as a poem by Shakespeare?

I know what you mean. I'm an anarchist, but lately, I've been growing more disillusioned with egalitarianism. I'm all for equal opportunity and I don't support social class, but after finding out that it's apparently élitist to consider Beethoven a better musician than Britney Spears or Nelly, I'm starting to wonder if Nietzsche was right, after all.

I think some people's attitude toward fine art is elitist, but the belief (recognition?) that it is superior artistically does not in itself make one elitist.

If you can state reasons why you think Beethoven is superior to Nelly (and I would certainly agree!), such as the fact that Beethoven is more sublime, engages the listener on more intellectual and emotional levels, and generates an artistic experience that "transcends" the immediate physical moment... then you are making an honest (non-elitist) judgment about what is valuable in art.

If, however, you enjoy Beethoven primarily because you know few people "understand him," or because you know your appreciation of classical music "sets you apart," then you are being elitist.

Don't try to tell me that years of study are necessarily going to create a better musician or artist. That simply isn't true. Many people study for years, and have nothing more than technical knowledge, but create nothing that inspires. Others pick up an instrument or a paint brush and create masterpieces. So no, you can not safely say who will produce better art, just because one artist has a degree, and the other doesn't. I'm amazed you would seriously suggest that...have you not met art/music students?Indeed, Frida Kahlo, Leonardo da Vinci, Turner, Fabergé, Mozart, Tchaikovsky, John Lennon, Mick Jagger, Robert Plant, Bob Marley and Jimi Hendrix. All of these had little or no training. I could go on and on and on about all the artists who had never been trained.

I think some people's attitude toward fine art is elitist, but the belief (recognition?) that it is superior artistically does not in itself make one elitist.

If you can state reasons why you think Beethoven is superior to Nelly (and I would certainly agree!), such as the fact that Beethoven is more sublime, engages the listener on more intellectual and emotional levels, and generates an artistic experience that "transcends" the immediate physical moment... then you are making an honest (non-elitist) judgment about what is valuable in art.

If, however, you enjoy Beethoven primarily because you know few people "understand him," or because you know your appreciation of classical music "sets you apart," then you are being elitist.

Quite so, that's my point.

Tell me, Sinuhue, do you believe in objective morality?

Fine, you can't quantify talent, but you can at least roughly compare innovation, time spent learning and practicing, and so on. I mean, if I type out a random series of words and call it a poem, are you seriously going to consider it equally good as a poem by Shakespeare?
Considering that in his time, Shakespeare was considered lowbrow, and fit for the common masses, I don't think you should be bringing him into this...not to mention the contravery as to who actually wrote those plays...

No, now you've gone back and started saying that time spent learning and practicing is somehow going to tell you who is the better musician or artist. No, no and no. If you base it on that, you'll get a bunch of people with degrees, and no guarantee of actual talent. Take the Blues again...you think the Blues masters studied their craft? Their 'training' happened along the way. Musicians all practice...can you say Britney practices less than some other musician? Is that necessarily going to tell you anything except 'who practices more'?

If your poem is good, what does it matter to me how much time and effort went into it? If I see a painting that really moves me, what does it matter if the artist has a degree in art or not? If I really love a song, I love that song. Period. It doesn't matter how learned or hardworking the artist is.

Bah, you've obviously never heard Beethoven rap.

I do believe that Opus 62 had the working title "Alla Ma Bitches"...

But Beethoven spent far more time and effort training and working on his work than either. That effort and talent should be recognized.

I agree, but I don't think it is the training and effort that makes the art. Many musicians train harder or longer than Beethoven, but will never attain his mastery.

Mozart wrote some of the most beautiful music in history with virtually no training at all.

If your only reason for thinking an artist is "better" is that her/his artistic expression required more work to produce, perhaps you are being "elitist" in some sense... in that you think art is better if the artist goes to art school (i.e. he/she is a member of an academic "elite").

Your judgment should be based on the art, not necessarily the artist.

Quite so, that's my point.

Tell me, Sinuhue, do you believe in objective morality?
Another topic for another time. And I reject the notion of artist superiority as defined by AnarchyeL if you are somehow reading that definition as being objective. (I don't think it was meant to be taken that way, frankly) That same notion of artist superiority attempts to compare, for example, distinct genres of music and art and make judgments on them 'objectively'. This is impossible. Art is subjective. Again, what you consider to be art, I may consider to be garbage. Which one of us is right? The person who has the most people backing them? Hardly. You can call garbage art, but that doesn't mean I'll believe you. I don't care for Nelly or Britney, but I also don't care for every work that Beethoven created.

Dig through all the music in the world, and attempt to come up with the 'best musician of all time' that we can all agree on. You seem to believe that this is possible.

Yes, you can compare them. If one artist spent years practicing and training and the other just picked up a paintbrush and started painting, I think we can safely say who would produce better art.

Oddly enough, that does seem to be more true of visual art than musical art. For some reason, something in the human mind seems to be attuned to music in such a way that, occasionally, our species produces a person who is "naturally" musical.

While natural talent also plays a large role in the visual arts, there are no real "savants," few pure geniuses who create masterpieces without any training or technical preparation.

(There are plenty of fine artists without "formal" training in art schools... but they tend to be part of local traditions with techniques of their own, or at the very least to have spent some time refining their own style.)

Very curious. :)

Another topic for another time. And I reject the notion of artist superiority as defined by AnarchyeL if you are somehow reading that definition as being objective. (I don't think it was meant to be taken that way, frankly)
You are correct, it was not.

I merely meant to indicate if you prefer some art to other art because it accords better with your values about what constitutes aesthetic beauty, then you are not being elitist.

If someone believes that the primary purpose of art is "entertainment," and he or she finds Nelly more entertaining than Mozart, who am I to argue?

But if I think that art should be something else, nothing about my choice of art makes me "elitist"... unless my reasons for the preference are themselves elitist.

The point of my "definition" is simply that it is the "thought that counts."

Following up on my last post...


Of course, I can always have that discussion of values with someone. I may try to convince the Nelly fan that he/she is missing out on something in Beethoven, and that if he/she would only invest the effort to get to know him he/she would be well-rewarded. I may also bring up arguments about what the role of art is in the human experience (to entertain? to educate? to inspire? to soothe?), and we might discuss which forms satisfy these aims... but these would always be discussions of value, with little objective material at all.

By the way, I think it does take some effort (at a minimum, exposure) to really appreciate any art form, including today's popular music. It may be that "anyone" can punch out a pop song in relatively short order, but I think there are gradations of nuance and subtlety that differentiate the best examples from the average backyard band.

What is interesting is that one only notices these if: a) one already has sufficient musical training to understand what is going on when exposed to something new; or b) one "pays attention" to these popular forms long enough to pick up on the subtleties.

So, even "low" art has a learning curve... I'm not sure what the full import of my point was supposed to be, since my thought was just interrupted by a phone call. So I'll leave it at that and let you take from it what you will.

:D

On the topic of musical talent, Dr. David Thorpe, who does the "Your Band Sucks" articles for Something Awful made a pretty apt comment.

He was singling out Prog rock and rock and roll in particular, but it fits music in general:

Prog-rock is an elaborate, terrified denial of the fundamental rock and roll fact that no matter how virtuosic and sophisticated a band gets, some junior-high dropout could step up with a guitar with four broken strings and play a song with enough soul to blow them out of the water forever.

Music is something far greater than a memorable formula.

While natural talent also plays a large role in the visual arts, there are no real "savants," few pure geniuses who create masterpieces without any training or technical preparation.
That's because in my experience people with no artistic training just create cliched shite that's been amateurly done a million times before.

I consider Beehtoven to be one of the best musicians ever. If you think composing beautiful lyrics takes alot of both hard work and talent, try composing beautiful music when you can't even hear it. That's what made his so talented. He created some of the most famous songs ever played while he was deaf(or just about). I guess it's like Da Vinci painting the Mona Lisa blindfolded.

As for PC, it is now unPC because it has the word political in it.

Clearly motzart was the greatest musician ever. I cite 'the marrige of figaro' to back this claim up. its his 250th birthday.

I think I like the term culturally sensitive

Clearly motzart was the greatest musician ever. I cite 'the marrige of figaro' to back this claim up. its his 250th birthday.

I think I like the term culturally sensitive
:D He was so great that you didn't even get his name right.;)

History being turned into Herstory even though the prefix his has nothing to do with the malel gender in that praticular word.

History being turned into Herstory even though the prefix his has nothing to do with the malel gender in that praticular word.
:eek: AAHH!!!! That was fucking awesome!!!:D :D :D :D :D :D

:eek: AAHH!!!! That was fucking awesome!!!:D :D :D :D :D :D
:D It works in quite a few places.

History being turned into Herstory even though the prefix his has nothing to do with the malel gender in that praticular word.

And when the term was coined that was known, it is a pun. Similar with womanipulate.

And when the term was coined that was known, it is a pun. Similar with womanipulate.
Some neo-feminists take it seriously apparently..

Some neo-feminists take it seriously apparently..

Well then they are idiots who cannot recognise a joke.

I know what you mean. I'm an anarchist, but lately, I've been growing more disillusioned with egalitarianism. I'm all for equal opportunity and I don't support social class, but after finding out that it's apparently élitist to consider Beethoven a better musician than Britney Spears or Nelly, I'm starting to wonder if Nietzsche was right, after all.

A bit of cultural elitism never hurt anyone.

Whatever, we get the point that PC *cough*Newspeak*cough* is a waste of time.

Whatever, we get the point that PC *cough*Newspeak*cough* is a waste of time.

On this point, read about NewBank?

http://www.safehaven.com/article-4740.htm

A bit of cultural elitism never hurt anyone.

I can think of more than one or two kings and queens that would disagree.

There's something you have to remember about the classical composers. They weren't just good, they were genii beyond compare. They could hear the music in their heads, write down exactly what they heard down to every part of the orchestra (which consists of dozens of instrumental parts, all of which have to be coördinated very carefully), and get it right just like you or I could think about what we intend to write and write it down.

Actually the proper terms are police officer, fire fighter and OBSOLETE. What the hell does it matter if that person is male or female?Matters quite a lot in a language that differentiates between male, female, and neuter nouns. :D

Whatever, we get the point that PC *cough*Newspeak*cough* is a waste of time.
It's also a *cough*strawman*cough*.

Everything can be taken too far, but the extremes do not represent the whole. Surely replacing '******' and 'porchmonkey' with 'African-American' is a good outcome? It caught on. You'll notice that 'personhole' has not replaced 'manhole'. Things have a way of not getting too ridiculous.

Matters quite a lot in a language that differentiates between male, female, and neuter nouns. :D
Smart ass, we're conversing in English, ya?

Um. Back to the original point, does anyone think political corectness is going to far, and examples are welcome.

Um. Back to the original point, does anyone think political corectness is going to far, and examples are welcome.
Overall, no, I don't think it has gone too far. Are there ridiculous examples of some people taking it to extremes? Hell yes. Do those people somehow taint the entire concept making it necessary to suddenly go back to using racial epithets, sexist and homophobic language? No. Kind of like we don't really need to ban Christianity, just because Fred Phelps is a fucking moron*.

*And no, I don't mean mentally disabled. I wouldn't want to insult those people by lumping them in with Phelps.

How do you know that? Perhaps in 2, 300 years if you go to a classical concert they'll be singing "Hit me baby one more time".:D
Didn't Fiddlebottoms point out that Britney was covering an old jazz tune with that one?
;)

Whatever, we get the point that PC *cough*Newspeak*cough* is a waste of time.
"I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace." —Shrubya, Washington, D.C. June 18, 2002

OP - not an example of PC.

Ok, bye

But Beethoven spent far more time and effort training and working on his work than either. That effort and talent should be recognized. I mean, Beethoven (and most other classical composers, for that matter) regularly composed works over 20 minutes long and even composed some over an hour long. How many songs by Nelly or Britney Spears are even 5 minutes long?


britney did the 5 minute ab thing...nuff said..lol


oh....and she let her chest flop around on the television...what amazing skill...woohooo...hope my daughter can master the tittie flop...she will be set.

i am rooting for her finishing college and getting a degree...color me old fashioned...and she is gorgeous...but to make money off your looks is cool..i would,but to have self respect..it takes a bit more then cleavage.

I'm Ludwig von, yes I'm the real Ludwig von
All you other Ludwig vons are just imitating
So won't the real Ludwig von please stand up,
please stand up, please stand up?
And THEN Shatner covered THAT. :eek:

:D It works in quite a few places.
Did it work for Michael Jackson?

The PC movement, while having some relevance in stripping away old petty discriminative terms and probably making life better for some minorities, is really spearheaded by fake lefties who lack the courage to stand up to exploitations at the heart of the system and thus channel their frustrations onto minor issues that are easily changeable.
In other words not seeing the forest for the trees.