Following up on what to do/H.O.P.E.
01.06.05 (9:10 pm) [edit]
I've been thinking about what to do for the following year, as described in a blog entry below. I'm sort of doing that and and also compiling reasons we should be optimistic-- and I'm serious about that. The right wins but must resort to more and more dispicable and desperate tactics each time, like a tactical chess player getting some edge in each minor skirmish while strategically their position is weakening and untenable. I really believe this and will have to spell out why at a later date.
As an artist, I see the battle against the dumbing down of my country as a political and a cultural issue. This is an important "Battle", because it isn't just the reactionaries that had issues with Janet Jackson or Ashlee Simpson, it is just that our issues with that level of entertainment are more complicated and we see the source of the problem more clearly and in detail than the religious right has it.
To that end I'd like to recommend this group, found at the this link, which you should right click and check out after complimenting me-- know know, say I must have been working out or something-- in the comments section: http://www.hopeinamerica.com/...
I thought this was a goof, but they look as serious as anything else. They are in the streets standing up to stupidity. Stupidity is our enemy. If people can't understand that Ashlee Simpson is a poor unfortunate fool being lead for the sole purpose of giving us the absolute lowest and stupidest level of "entertainment", how can they understand the level of fraud that Bush is? It is in deed one battle. As I said in an earlier blog, the only difference between Paris Hilton and G.W. Bush is their gender and the year they were born. When H.O.P.E. attacks Paris Hilton and suceeds, Bush will diminish a little because it is the same bogus media that props them both up over all reason and good taste.
As an artist, I see the battle against the dumbing down of my country as a political and a cultural issue. This is an important "Battle", because it isn't just the reactionaries that had issues with Janet Jackson or Ashlee Simpson, it is just that our issues with that level of entertainment are more complicated and we see the source of the problem more clearly and in detail than the religious right has it.
To that end I'd like to recommend this group, found at the this link, which you should right click and check out after complimenting me-- know know, say I must have been working out or something-- in the comments section: http://www.hopeinamerica.com/...
I thought this was a goof, but they look as serious as anything else. They are in the streets standing up to stupidity. Stupidity is our enemy. If people can't understand that Ashlee Simpson is a poor unfortunate fool being lead for the sole purpose of giving us the absolute lowest and stupidest level of "entertainment", how can they understand the level of fraud that Bush is? It is in deed one battle. As I said in an earlier blog, the only difference between Paris Hilton and G.W. Bush is their gender and the year they were born. When H.O.P.E. attacks Paris Hilton and suceeds, Bush will diminish a little because it is the same bogus media that props them both up over all reason and good taste.
posted by: DianneMaire (reply)
post date: 01.07.05 (3:20 am)
The current dumbing down, as you call, it in America doesn't say much
for evolution.
I don't have much to say on the Simpson thing. Thankfully, it wasn't shown on French television.
Gosh MH you must've been working out or something! :)
posted by: musicalhair (reply)
post date: 01.07.05 (4:16 am)
Reply to: DianneMaire
Why yes I have, thanks for noticing. Seriously, I laughed pretty well when I read that: thanks.
I think if we are evolving then the stupid among us will like Ashlee Simpson just fine while we evolve up and out. "Culture is cuumulative" and evolves, but it is up to us to make our culture of peace and enlightened values and thoughtfulness moe viable than the culture of the "sheeple" that follow Ashlee's handlers the same as they follow Bush's.
posted by: tomi (reply)
post date: 01.09.05 (2:30 am)
This is beautiful. I often find myself wondering why we're supposed to give a crap about 88% of the people on television.
posted by: musicalhair (reply)
post date: 01.09.05 (9:15 am)
Reply to: tomi
Hey thanks for checking in!
The only reason I can think of is that it is cheaper for the media moguls to throw these people infront of us that actually talented people. Real art by it's nature is supposed to be divisive a little bit anyway or get you to think. But none of the three songs perfromed at the orange bowl were meant to make you think. I'm not saying none of it is "art" but that the value of art is in the artistic statement it makes and none of this seeks ever to make any statement that lasts or gives one a pause to think.
I'm just glad that H.O.P.E. is on the way!
posted by: starchybean (reply)
post date: 01.10.05 (9:15 am)
Hey, thanks for responding on my blog... good to know someone read it.
I like your post; it parrallels a little to what I said about evangelism in America. It's true that the dumbing down of society is our enemy. Not only for the reasons you listed, but it pits the people who support and love intellect against those who revel in Ashlee Simpson's idiocy.
I'm an artist myself (I paint and throw pots) and I found myself nodding when you said that we shouldn't necessarily judge what is art, but it appears to me also that society gives little or no value to most types of art that are on the fringe, or outside of, our consumerist attitude.
This is why pop music is so popular--you can hear it being played at WalMart, McDonald's, Target, etc. It's popular at places where Americans go to consume and is the artistic posterchild for consumption.
I suppose the visual equal of pop music wouldn't be pop art (Warhol-esque, which actually had creativity and criticism behind it, unlike modern pop music) but painters such as Thomas Kinkade and the like who create hotel room paintings to be made into hundreds of thousands of cheap posters and sold for 10.99 at Ikea.
Gah, truly disgusting. Thanks for blogging.
posted by: musicalhair (reply)
post date: 01.10.05 (2:55 pm)
Reply to: starchybean
Excellent excellent points! I did see that your evangelism post was dealing with some of the same issues/problems, but I didn't think anyone would get it. Very cool that you picked up on it-- I think it amounts to an artistic "eye" or the kind of non-linear thinking that art is all about.
You are also right on about pop-art. Warhol made "art" or high-art from pop culture themes. He'd be to the graphic commercial artist like Bartok would be to the folk musicians he adopted themes from.
I've heard of a lot of things being done with pot, but not throwing it-- except to avoid a bust :^) I guess you make pottery, very cool.
