Where Have You Gone, Alvy Singer?
by Schizoid Mann
How did they do it?
Let’s face it, liberals didn’t take over our schools, the entire American education system by protesting. Sure, they made a lot of noise with their complaining, their picketing, but did that do the trick? Did that turn the tide? Did that transform what was once a learning environment that inspired inquisitiveness and curiosity, into a showplace for materialism – where we once taught respect for our men and women in uniform, rather than offering extra credit for flag burning – where teachers once encouraged independence, rather than reliance – where we once taught the lessons of history, rather than condemning it – where we once instilled responsibility, rather than simply handing out condoms? How did they change what was once a morally conservative, patriotic institution, proud and respectful of our military, our flag, our constitution, our history and our culture into something that can only be described as Liberals gone wild?
So, then, how did they do it?
Let’s think about it. How could a nation that put men on the moon now consistently rank last or near-last in international testing in science and mathematics? How could a school system formerly eager to introduce young minds to Steinbeck, Hemingway, Bradbury and Wells shun those authors and replace them with others deemed more diverse, more controversial, more ‘edgy’?
What happens to a culture when Michelangelo, Renoir and Magritte are equated and then replaced by Mapplethorpe, Christo and Tunic (Yes, that aptly-named ‘artist’ who convinces multitudes to disrobe in public.)
What’s going on? What have we done? What have we let be done?
Anyone who has watched Jay Leno’s Jay Walking segment certainly has seen what’s been done, seen all too clearly the horror of the living dead, the intellectual zombies, hungry, not for brains, but for gadgets, tattoos and pierces and all the while delusional that their addictions are somehow saving Mother Earth from ‘evil corporations’. I would wager that this righteous generation’s overwhelming need for the latest and greatest, the most up-to-date iThing is creating demand for more chemicals, more petroleum products, more child labor and human rights abuses than any generation that has come before.
What has produced this twisted mentality, this skewed mindset? Was it family or Hollywood? Hollywood blames the family, yet consistently offers our children a daily breakfast fortified with all the essential cruel and sadistic acts of violence imaginable, topped with fresh and juicy loveless sex and a heaping spoonful of vulgarity. Just what every growing kid needs.
Was it always this way? Was Hollywood always in the business of manufacturing garbage? I suddenly recall a scene from one of my favorite movies, Annie Hall. It goes something like this:
Television producer Rob, played by Tony Roberts is showing Annie Hall and Alvy Singer, played by Diane Keaton and Woody Allen, around the fine homes and neighborhoods of Beverly Hills.
Annie remarks, “God, it’s so clean out here.”
Alvy replies, “They don’t throw their garbage away. They make it into television shows.”
Was Hollywood always a sewer pipe, funneling the absolute worst examples of human nature to our theaters, our living rooms and now our gadgets? Of course not. This site is evidence of that. Here, folks are coming together because they are sick and tired of the shift, the sea change of content that Hollywood calls entertainment and what more accurately could be called the super-sizing of violence and smut in our mainstream culture.
Present an image of sawed-off limbs and a laughing psychopath (with all the best lines), and Hollywood replies, “That’s Entertainment!” Is it entertainment to present images that should produce gagging rather than profits? Hollywood obviously thinks so.
Liberals didn’t take over our education system by complaining. They did it by becoming teachers and administrators.
We want Hollywood to change, do we? Well, I believe, this is our cue.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
135 Comments
People have a desire toward ennoblement and debasement. It is up to the producer of art to create that which ennobles and beautifies his culture rather than playing toward the worst. Both parties have responsibility in choosing that which betters the world. However, the creator needs to keep in mind that there are those who would choose well, if he sets a good example and produces a good product. The weak need to be guarded about with heroes and exemplars to inspire them to be greater than they are, and for the strong to be inspired to become heroes.
This is maybe the least intelligent thing I have ever seen posted on the internet, excepting IMDb. All straw men, all the time. No substantiation of ANYTHING. You take an ivory tower position while using…Jay Leno…(as a logically fallacious anecdotal evidence no less). You complain that all Hollywood produces is filth…using a movie (that you view positively) to back you up. You treat Hollywood like it's a sentient being, some sort of weird Cthulhu living underneath that big white sign. Also, it's piercings, not pierces.
Seriously, there is no way you are this stupid. I refuse to believe it.
Unfortunately we will have to figure a way to (GASP!) censor (GASP!) the media and the Internet.
Try grasping the problems with that one. In a couple of keystrokes anyone can view any perversion imaginable on the Internet, how does this enhance our lives ?
Theaters are full of junk, tv the same, porno has showed up in your living room, like it or not. You remember being 13?
Of course it starts at home, but it would be nice to get some help from the schools and the advertisers who want to sell more crap like bratz (read preteen slut) and Grand Theft Auto (read anarchy and mayhem) .
What is a parent to do ? Does anyone care what the stuff of our children's dreams is made of?
Good article. Academia has always been a refuge for liberals who never wanted to grow up and preferred to remain in a childlike bubble around other kids/young adults. The bastion of leftwing lunacy in academia was all made possible by tenure. Tenure should be abolished; teachers should be held accountable for their behavior and poor performance just like the rest of us and not shielded. Instead we have degenerates masquerading as professors and calling students fascists if they so much as say anything that could be perceived as deviating from the gayhadist anti-family anti-American script, which is what recently happened at Valley College in Van Nuys.
Continued………………
Academia and media have become Orwellian theater. They do all they can to insulate their little Bolsheviks and viewers from any dissenting opinion while peddling their leftwing drivel incessantly, regardless of the class. As far as academia this does happen mainly in the liberal arts but it's not confined to just that marxist fever swamp. History is threatening to the leftwing kooks in academia because it shows what a horrific failure their views and ideology have been, particularly over the last century. This is why history is essentially no longer taught, and what is taught is usually revisionist nonsense. Note how our affirmative action president sent back the bust of Churchill; he didn't want to be reminded that it was Conservatives that saved the world from nazi tyranny and that it was atheistic socialists/fascists that plunged the world into war.
Continued………………
Then academia and the media use Orwellian newspeak to fool their stupid followers. They'll use deceptive terms such as “Fairness”doctrine, which is anything but fair, it is a blatant assault on our right to free speech. They'll say it's “for the children” or “for mother gaia”, they promote medieval barbarity such as late term abortions under the banner of “it's my body” [fine, give birth and put the baby up for adoption- then kill yourself]. These are sick and twisted people that are teaching our children from K through higher education. I would burn it all down and rebuild it.
Hollywood is a sewer for the most part. Anyone whose lived here and known some of these people in the various film/music industries or worked in Hollywood understands that most of these people are vapid airheads and their stupidity is reflected in the trash they put out, which is why I maybe see 3 movies a year and I am usually disappointed each time.
Continued…………
It is amazing how you choose to engage and respond to nothing that's been presented here.
If you think these ideas are so stupid, why do even bother to come here?
Sidenote……The movie Taken was phenomenal, if you want a movie that's the antithesis of political correctness this is pretty damn good. The last scene is worth paying twice for admission.
Done. Damn that was brutal. I didn't realize the comments have to be fortune cookie size.
No legitimate arguments are put forth in this argument. The end statement is legitimate, but redundant because it's all but the mission statement of this site. Everything before that was either idiotic, off topic, based in a fantasyworld, or simple claptrap. My response is that there is nothing to respond to.
And, as I have said in other posts, I come to this board because I have no desire to sit around and read and listen to what people who agree with me have to say. It's boring and coddling. I'm much rather see what people who are diametrically opposed to me think. It forces me to constantly reconsider my own stance. It makes you sharper and more clear on what you actually believe. Too, I am no party line liberal. I see the value of fiscal conservatism and find the left's new found crush on Hamas to be utterly repugnant, if not outright antisemitic. Also, I don't think guns are the devil, which makes me persona non gratis to the kool-aid drinkers on the left.
It's BS when Jeffery Wells writes about wanting to purge the world or conservatives with Dr. Manhattan-like powers and it's BS when Big Hollywood posts drivel like this.
That said, Mo, I actually generally read your posts specifically. They often infuriate me, but you're usually a cut above. So I'll keep hanging out, and you can feel free to ignore me. But I'm gonna keep reading, and watching out for your posts.
wait…what happened at Valley College?
Debbie Schlussel was right to attack "Watchmen" on grounds of morality. I admire her for that, because she was going up against 3 generations of 'relativism.' Good for her.
If you were to run for office, I'd not only vote for you, but would do volunteer work for your campaign (a statement that would boggle the mind of anyone who knew me- for I loathe and detest politicians!).
I only have one "negative" comment- I'm afraid you'd have to change your name, because I daresay some folks would balk at voting for someone named "The Great Satan" (though it wouldn't bother ME in the slightest as long as you swore to uphold those principles described in your postings).
[...] Our education system is left bent as a result of liberals becoming the majority of teachers and administrators. Now they are able to continue the brainwashing of the current generation. [...]
One of my main complaints about entertainment is that it usually panders to the lowest common denominator. Just because you can find examples of debasement in society doesn't mean we need to glamorize it. The way I see it, people are going to buy what's available no matter what it is. If we're spoon fed reality shows that feature strippers and drug addicts, then that's what we're going to watch and slowly but surely it's going to become so mainstreamed that our kids will think it's not that bad to become a porn star when you grow up. I worked on at TV show back in the mid-90's and a couple of associate producers I worked with were trying to put together a 'feel-good' show about people who had 'beat-the-odds,' I tried to help by digging up stories.
(continued…)
It featured stories about gang-bangers who turned their life around and were helping kids get out gangs. We also had a story about a guy who was a double leg amputee who ran a marathon on his prosthetics. Stuff like that. We couldn't sell it. We were told that good news doesn't sell. That is an old mantra in Hollywood. There are people out there who will try to bring entertainment up to a higher level rather than constantly going to the sleaziest level possible. The problem right now is who do you sell it to? Obviously people like the good news stuff, as shows like "Extreme Home Makeover" show. Sure the show is glossy, but it always features families in need getting a leg up and the audience loves it. You can't tell me that people won't watch if we put more family oriented programming on TV. I think a "Little House on the Prairie" type show would do real well right now.
(continued from earlier post *currently in moderation*)
It featured stories about gang-bangers who turned their life around and were helping kids get out gangs. We also had a story about a guy who was a double leg amputee who ran a marathon on his prosthetics. Stuff like that. We couldn't sell it. We were told that good news doesn't sell. That is an old mantra in Hollywood. There are people out there who will try to bring entertainment up to a higher level rather than constantly going to the sleaziest level possible. The problem right now is who do you sell it to? Obviously people like the good news stuff, as shows like "Extreme Home Makeover" show. Sure the show is glossy, but it always features families in need getting a leg up and the audience loves it. You can't tell me that people won't watch if we put more family oriented programming on TV. I think a "Little House on the Prairie" type show would do real well right now.
I would totally vote for TGS as well, so long as his love of TAKEN remained at the forefront of said campaign.
"A classroom dispute at Los Angeles City College in the emotional aftermath of Proposition 8 has given rise to a lawsuit testing the balance between 1st Amendment rights and school codes on offensive speech.
Student Jonathan Lopez says his professor called him a "fascist bastard" and refused to let him finish his speech against same-sex marriage during a public speaking class last November, weeks after California voters approved the ban on such unions.
When Lopez tried to find out his mark for the speech, the professor, John Matteson, allegedly told him to "ask God what your grade is," the suit says."
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-speech16-...
Hunter, my politics is more akin to 300. If I were President I would have a bottomless pit built in the Oval Office and then I would summon all the donks………….
Thanks Saul.
I vote for "Taken", too. And "Gran Torino". Other than that, I don't think I saw a movie this year worth a box of popcorn.
Facts don't lie. The United States scores ARE dismal. Some of it is because some of our students are dumber than sticks, some of our teachers are incompetent, and that we pay administrators pushing papers more than we pay teachers for teaching.
However, I'd, to see some stats that compare like with like. Let's see the test scores of students at Sidwell Friends and St. Ablons (where hoi polloi politicians including our president) send their kids against similar schools in Europe, i.e. the British "public" schools and Europeans' private academies. So far as Washington DC, which has a dismal record, how do their stats compare to the public school students in Johannesburg? Do American Japanese students compare favorably with their cousins in Japan. How do our other Asians fare with their Asian counterparts, American HIspanics in California schools compared to those in Mexico City? The USA is a gigantic melting pot into which we throw all our students and then compare their test scores to less diverse societies. It's like throwing apples, plums and oranges into a pile and comparing them to bananas.
In my opinion, and it's just that, an opinion, public American education began to suffer when schools became social experiments, where children with physical and mental handicaps were "mainstreamed" and teachers had to start teaching to the lowest common denominator. My daughter-in-law was a first grade teacher in a Title I school in a southern state. In one of her classes, she had a child who was so violent and disruptive that the school system had to hire a "minder", an adult who's JOB it was to sit in class with this little guy and when he went off, restrain him so that he didn't harm himself or another student. First of all, the salary that went to the "minder" could have been put to better use educating the students who weren't off their rockers. Secondly, what about the kids in the class who were endangered because this one kid deserved to be mainstreamed? It's NUTS!
Further, we are so steeped in political correctness that we can't "test" for intelligence and capabilities as they do in Europe. Students who are not intellectually qualified to go to higher education are funneled into vocational work.
We refuse to do that here because we're afraid we won't get the right quotas in college and/or vocational work.
Europe doesn't have that handicap. I believe, and someone can correct me if I'm wrong, both Ringo Starr and George Harrison were denied the opportunity for higher education in Britain's educational system. Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think they were hampered financially for not being college educated.
My Dad is a retired U.S.A.F. pilot of the Korea and Vietnam era. He related a story to me the other day about landing his military plane in Bangkok, Thialand in the 60's. There were no U.S. military bases in Thialand so when he had to go there he entered the commercial pattern and landed amidst the airliners and such using Thialands main airport. Obviously he was in U.S. military flight garb and he told me of always having Thai youth approching him in amd outside the airport with "Hi, Cowboy" or saluting him. What they knew of this blue eyed, blonde haired Midwesterner they learned from American movies. John Wayne, Gary Cooper, the various stars of the American cinema strood across their domains, proud, God-fearing Americans that didn't stomp on the flag like the latter day "stars" we see today. Is our aura in the world diminished today? If it is, and think it is, but not irretrievably, it's not George W. Bush's fault, it's the fault of one our most lasting, and potent opinion maker of who we are, American cinema. If we hate us, why should the world disagree?
So, it's nice and safe and cozy in the middle. Everybody loves you and you really don't have to take a stand about anything. You reject the editing done in Jaywalking as a means to produce just the most idiotic Californians as one type of propaganda, yey embrace at least some core tenets of liberalism. At least that's what I gather from what you've written. The point is that media driven culture is, or seems to be driving a broken education system even lower, a valid point. The left has broken our education system with it's p.c. enviromentalism, save the whales, gay is good, "step back Jack or we'll sue you" mentality. It's pleasant results, or no results, period. Why has mathematics and history fallen off the curriculum? Is there a good "middle of the road" excuse for that? By the way, would you pleaze check my spelling for me?
Can’t add much to what the TGS has said, “well done!” However as an anecdote as it relates to the question of, why? I can remember being a kid in the 60’s. The counter culture was pushing, to be an educator, reporter, arts, a politician, so we can change the world. Infiltrate these institutions and our egalitarian utopia with be at hand, “news flash,” we’re there folks. Carter cured me of my stupid notions of life, I pray Obama will have the same effect. Hope!
It makes little Hunter feel like his life has meaning.
Hey, G.S., sooo true. Much to Hunter's dismay I'm a student at the University of Texas El Paso. That may or may not be up to Hunters obviously lofty standards, we'll see. The professors here are for the most part doctrinaire liberals, with their collective heads so far up the Dem party's arse, all the while servicing liberalism orally, it's not even funny. I'd transfer but, to where? Mars? There is one conservative history professor with the funniest office door though, he has a cartoon of the "Clinton Memorial" prominantly featured, a seated Bill Clinton, like Lincoln, and has an intern, on her knees, head in his lap, er…servicing him. It's a laugh riot. By the way, all hope is not lost. On the billboard advertising law schools, some insightful student has scrawled in big, giant letters F— OBAMA! Ah, a tiny little flower of hope springs from the apocalyptic destruction being wrought by the Messiah. Hunter, check my spelunking, er spelling.
"Further, we are so steeped in political correctness that we can't "test" for intelligence and capabilities as they do in Europe. Students who are not intellectually qualified to go to higher education are funneled into vocational work."
You're 100% correct about that. Just one MORE evil consequence of our political correctness "gone wild"!
My daughter spent her school years in Holland, and there were three different levels of "middle" school (a combination of junior high and high school). Rather than penalizing the…slower…students by expecting them to perform at the same level as the brighter ones (and penalizing the brighter ones even MORE by forcing them to adhere to the "lowest common denominator" in each class), students were guided towards the type of middle school which suited their capacity to learn. Not only is that system ultimately better for EVERYONE involved (including the teachers!), but there is much less bullying going on by those dimwits who despise anyone more intelligent then them.
On a sadder note: shortly after the massive influx of Moslims began (in the early 1980's), the two lower levels of middle school started to drastically lower their standards in order to accommodate their childrens' poor grasp of Dutch; and this situation was not unlike that of schools here in the USA drastically lowering THEIR standards to accommodate the poor English comprehension of Hispanic students who hear little English in their homes.
No, thank YOU for that fabulous post!
Thanks for sharing the story behind that "Appolyon" moniker (of which I was unaware)!
What's more, any proponent of a "bottomless pit" for donks is my kind of guy.
Feel free to email me direct anytime at:
saul@historyofhypnotism.com
TYPO ALERT: I meant, of course, "Apollyon".
Have you tried having a conversation with a school teacher? I remember professionals with passion. These folks now are like post office clerks, counting the minutes, doing as little as necessary and least of all showing any concern for their customers.
So…you're point is to just blindly follow party line…this seems like the worst possible decision to me. I'm no economist, but I see the value of a small government. But, as part of that small government I think they should stay out of the bedroom, the drug cabinet, and religion in general.
It's not that Jaywalking is propaganda so much as it is made to make people look foolish. I'm comfortable in front of a camera, i could answer any of his questions, but I would never be caught dead doing so. The segment is based upon self selection and exploitation of those who are confused by shoving a camera and a bright light in their face. Half those people probably DO know the answers but don't under that type of perceived pressure. All the same, my statement about the absurdity of acting ivory tower whilst referencing Jay Leno stands.
I know how much Californian schools suck. I went through them quite recently. They do not foster higher thinking, in fact, they punish it. For example, I took my teacher to task for making us read, "Nectar in a Sieve" instead of "Grapes of Wrath". the school considered the former to be multi-cultural. I called it a rip off. When we had to write an essay I simply turned in a list of things that Sieve stole from Wrath. Later, I was almost expelled because I refused to write an essay praising a Palestinian "documentary" that was ostensibly about how all Jews are evil and all Palestinians are innocent victims. The system is deeply broken. The school had no intention, ability, or interest in teaching me. Instead, i was a "trouble maker" because I questioned the validity of the lesson plan instead of swallowing it.
So you are saying the best way to change Hollywood/Academia is to work in Hollywood/Academia. That's a great theory but with one major flaw:
"So, you want to work in our studio/university. We'll have to check your qualifications. Are you a Republican or a Democrat? You are a Republican? I'm sorry you lack the qualifications. Next!"
Continued…
It's one thing to have shaky grammar and spelling in a message board post. It is something else entirely to use a word that is simply wrong when one is writing as a would be professional journalist. If words are your livelihood, then you should damn well know the words.
As for why our schools suck…well, our history classes are absurd. But not because of liberal interference. They're just stupid. When you pass something like No-Child-Left-Behind, or the Governators decree that all schools teach the same lesson from the same book, on the same day, you already move towards the lowest common denominator. Using tests as a barometer is one of the root problems, and I say this as someone who has repeatedly benefited from his ability to take tests. My prowess at multiple choice quizzes and IQ tests and what not has given me a lot of great stuff. But just because it's good for me doesn't mean it's a good system.
It's not that we need to spend more on education, it's that we need to spend smarter. We need less rote repitition of basic subjects and more of a focus on interpretation. The former is a way to create cogs, the latter is a way to create thinkers. Unfortunately, the current model of teaching to standards utterly eliminates the possibility for the latter. and so we end up dumbing things down.
It is a problem that both sides of the aisle are involved in. Well meaning meddlers who know nothing about psychology or what actual learning is. Me? I learned most of what I know because of a few dedicated teachers, a lot of reading outside of class, and a general assumption that most of what I was shown in class was going t o be a crash course in something I would be better off studying on my own.
No. Life has no meaning but that which you assign to it. Though truth and reality do exist, the facts are most often beyond our basic human comprehension. Thus, all we can do is sit and stare at the cave walls and try to interpret the shadows. I actually have a semi-involved ontological argument about the nature of existence if you would like to see it…
I did insult IMDb, but made no attacks towards you.
Well, you already won one of those. Bratz dolls are no longer on shelves.
Ah…well, that's stupid. While I think that Prop 8 should have been writing as an amendment rather than a revision, it is silly to silence the voices of those against it. I personally am against gay marriage for the simple reason that I am against hetero marriage. It is simply not the state's place. If you want a legal marriage, go to the courthouse and sign a legal document (which everyone should be allowed to do). If you want a religious ceremony, go to a church. If the church doesn't want to marry a gay couple, an interfaith couple, or even an interracial couple, that is their prerogative, and they should face no penalty for it.
In any case, that teacher should be fired, if not for silencing debate, then for not knowing what the word "fascism" means.
written as an amendment, rather.
Again, using the wrong word is not the same thing as misspelling, and using the wrong word as a professional wordsmith is not the same thing as a blog response.
Also, I go to UCSB, often called the University of Casual Sex and Beer. My point is not that I'm some great intellectual, just that Jay Leno is as middlebrow as it gets. I do love me some Woody Allen though, so touche to that. Then again, I remember a lot of casual sex and drug use in that film…
I think that show would have a place, as would Little House on the Prairie. The issue is simply with marketing. It's likely that the guys/girls you were working with simply didn't have a good marketing hook/pilot. But then, I don't watch TV and am canceling my cable now that I have an alternate way to get internet cheaply.
My experience:
In the 70s, quite a few of the best and brightest of my friends wanted to be teachers. I stayed in touch with them over the years and found that none of them, even those who got the credential had followed the teaching profession. The explanation, uniformly, was that the schools were little more than baby sitting centers now. A common thread was the elimination of corporal punishment and things just went downhill from there.
I also know some people who became teachers. These were less accomplished than my previous friends, you could say they were pretty average of intellect. The common thread with them was that they weren't all that interested in teaching as an end, but were highly charged to "do something to help people" or "change the world". The liberal archtype was a over represented member of these folks.
Hmm, those systems do exist in the US. I know because I went through them for elementary, middle school, and part of high school.
The LAUSD has a magnet (read: integration) program for those with IQ's over 145, wherein you can get into a very well funded program designed to cater to those of so-called advanced intellects. It was so much better than getting into fist fights every day like I had previously. (I used "big words" and wore glasses and thus seemed like an easy mark. Always fought back, and usually won, but there was still a never ending onslaught of wouldbe bullies). The problems began in high school, instead of allowing us to learn for the joy of it, we were ostensibly punished and given work that was difficult for the sake of difficulty. Had we been graded and treated like normal high schoolers but allowed to push ourselves intellectually it would have been splendid. But, instead we got shafted with "they're smart, so lets just obfuscate the point."
After 10th grade, i just switched to another school. When I came back to see my friends, they had all become potheads (or worse) because of the pressure. The girl who cried because she got 98% on 1 test in the 8th grade thus destroying her perfect record was now aces at bong rips. It was sad. These days I'm at a place where I get to set my own challenges and work for the sake of learning. It's a real shame that our school systems make that so hard to do.
I do not know enough about the last part of your statement to comment on it.
Interesting point.
Hunter, points well taken; regarding our psuedo professional "bloggist" to coin a phrase, aren't they, and by extension we, just flying by the proverbial seats of our pants here? I'm not here for styilistic "savoire faire". Coming to "Big Hollywood" for me is like stopping at a greasy spoon diner, the food is great, I'm not sweating the presentation. For instance, I don't type, formally, I blast through, two and three fingers at a time. It works for me. I write in a "stream of consience" format and think we should give the various people here license to concentrate on the substance, not the style. Just a thought.
A reference to Plato's "Republic", very intellectually sneaky of you!
Fair enough. G-d knows the things I've posted on the site I write for aren't copy edited perfectly.
Ya, I'm on board now. Having reread and given you due for points well made I think we agree on much of what was said here.
I compared you writing to a good ol' greasy spoon diner, Schiz. Great content in a familiar, not stylistically haughty way. There you go, a non-left handed compliment.
Sad to hear how the pressure took down your friends like that- though I suppose it's better than suicide, which seems to be the "solution" to such pressure in Japan…
The system in Holland was perfect for my daughter- who went on to medical school after her top-tier high school and got her M.D. in Rotterdam in 2001, at a staggering cost to us of about $2,300 a year (NOT a typo!).
No such "LAUSD" programs as you described when I was going through school in Penna. in the 60's. Their solution to my I.Q. (similar to yours) was simply to skip me a grade- which made me the youngest student in every class from then on.
I was a woefully immature 16 when I was sent off to college (Michigan), and dropped out after only a year.
Worked out for the best though- because the lefties never got a chance to brainwash me like they did to most of my friends.
P.S. my grandma used to say that Ph.D stood for "Piled High and Deep"…; – )
The best way to make a guy passionate about writing is to have a cute girl pay attention to him because of his prose or poetry. Worked well for me.
I never played video games but had a voracious appetite for any video cassette available from the local library. I didn't have any spending money to speak of, but I discovered that I could get in (and back stage!) for free if I found somewhere to write about the concerts I wanted to attend. And, the backstage passes certainly didn't hurt my ability to impress the aforementioned girls. And suddenly, almost accidentally, I discovered that I loved writing more than just about anything else.
I think that while you and I might disagree on some of the details, we see things in a similar way. And that is why I come to places like this. You can discover hidden middle grounds that can make things more clear.
Thank you for being intelligent.
–Hunter
I think that's the first time anyone has ever called that reference.
Growltiger,
You're all over it with your 'lowest common demoninator' statement from my point of view. All children are unique and I've only had the experience of one (my daughter will be school-aged next year), but we have home-schooled our son since the 1st grade. His cousin (my niece) who is a year older was doing so well as a home-schooler that we decided to give it a try. Where she is studious and ambitious, my son has been a pretty typical reluctant student. In the case of my niece, she graduated at sixteen and at not-yet eighteen has almost completed a college course. She is brilliant. My son, who has to be goaded a bit still tested in the upper percentiles in all areas of study in a test given to students nation-wide. His reading skills are in the 99th percentile.
While I'm sure that some of it is innate (a nice spin on the genetic wheel of fortune), I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that he has always been able to learn at his own pace. We can tailor his study to him and not to the level of the least cooperative or least intellectually blessed kid who happens to be the same age and live in the same neighborhood. Oh, yeah. He typically does school three days a week for five hours a day.
Also, we can include in his study things that we think help his development that would not be allowed in a public school setting.
I don't mean to insult well-meaning people who put their heart and soul into educating young ones. I just don't believe that the environment that has been created is in any way the most conducive to learning. Far from it.
If you want to home school, please make sure you also find lots of ways to make your child interact with other kids. I know some people who were home schooled, and while they are very intelligent, that are also socially crippled to a shocking extend.
The girls who are left completely unaware of why the leery-eyed boys are paying attention to them suffer most.
Your son sounds similar to myself in some aspects. I test in the top one half of one half of one percent in verbal skills, a feat that ironically enough makes communication very difficult at times, He especially needs to spend time with his peers or else he runs the risk of ending up incredibly intelligent, and totally unable to function.
As a side note, thank you for taking the time to care about your child. The world would be better with more folks like yourself.
Well, I've been involved in oodles of test screenings, focus groups, ect. ect.
I recently found out that my opinion was disregarded in 100% of those scenarios. Anyone who seems "above average" in any way is ignored. So, it's not that idiots make movies, it's that smart people are forced to make movies for idiots. And as John August recently said in his (wonderful) blog. You're sadly better off being a mediocre writer who is great in a room, than being a great writer who is a bit too introverted.
Ya, damn university "edakation". It's corrupted me, I gave up selling cars and being a manager in the car biz, all to spot a reference to Plato.
I'll bear that in mind. My first published piece was a revue of a "Bad Co." show in 1975. I was a dumbass kid, way too young to drink. Had a blast and, much to your formula, had girls complimenting me on my story, complete with photo. Sadly Boz Burrell has passed on, as has Bad Co., thank God for satellite radio.
Oh no…not the old "socialization" bugaboo!! I have 5 grandchildren that are homeschooled (two different families) and they are quite the little social butterfllies…they go places and do things (with others their age) that public school kids never get to do. If a kid turns out weird, he would've turned out weird(er) at a public school…and not as well taught on top of it all. That is utter BS that homeschool kids don't get to interact with other kids…utter and complete BS.
I went to public schools throughout the 60's and graduated in '73-I had excellent teachers and crap teachers (the crap ones started in around Junior High), but what remained constant in those days was RESPECT. There is no longer any respect for:
Adults (teachers or parents)
American History
Law Enforcement
Diverse opinion
God
So many (not all) public school teachers are low-SAT, party-hearty, wanna-be-cool-friends-with-the-kids "teachers" rather than real adults. Also in the time I went to school, the tasks required of teachers were much more than now-there were no "aides" for every room (with over 30 kids in every classroom). Every teacher pulled playground duty (remember recess?!), lunchroom duty, etc. And our grades could kick butt back then. Maybe we could fund better teachers if we didn't have to waste money on worthless administrators and "aides". I would never have a kid in a public school nowadays.
I'm speaking only of my (admittedly limited) personal experience.
There ARE problems, and these issues can be exacerbated if the child is of an exceptionally high IQ. Kids who classify as "genius" on IQ tests often have a hard time getting on with others. I know because I went to school with 100 other kids with on that level. It's already hard, having limited interaction with the outside world will make things even harder.
"Hollywood blames the family, yet consistently offers our children a daily breakfast fortified with all the essential cruel and sadistic acts of violence imaginable, topped with fresh and juicy loveless sex and a heaping spoonful of vulgarity."
Ahhh….there's an app for that! I swear if I hear that one more time my head WILL explode. Forget duct tape. I'll need a rubber (yea! for petrochemicals) room….
Well said. Good is good, no matter genre, era. People settle for what is out there. Give them quality, and they will love it. Give them mediocrity and they will take it, but not love it, until it becomes the only thing around. Then they'll have no choice but to love it. The recent article on Darfur, the small boy and the plastic bottles should make that point all too clear.
Terry Rossio and Ted Elliot once remarked that a lot of people see Hollywood movies that, perhaps, stink to high heaven and say, "Hey, I can do better than that!" And then proceed to write just better than that. The goal should not be to make crap + 1.
I agree with this philosophy. Make the best product you can make, create the most profound work you can create. If you strive for perfection, then the inevitable result may not be that, but it will be a worthwhile endeavor that isn't simply trying to outdo what's already on the shelves, in the theaters, etc.
Yes, Schizoid Mann, on target. I love the quote on making their garbage into television shows. Is trash the only thing that sells?
Only a third of Americans can name the 3 branches of government, let alone explain what they do: http://tinyurl.com/dggglx
And he's using Annie Hall as an example of someone beloved by H'wood — and by no means a right-winger — pointing out the industry's decline was evident 32 years ago.
He's generalizing, but whether he's over-generalizing need not depend on politics, as Woody demonstrates.
I'm getting your post Schizoid Mann. It just won't show up anywhere except my email for whatever reason…
Anyway. Where did I insult you? I insulted your argument, but we're both adults. You should be able to understand that you are entirely separate from your argument. Saying that I think you're more intelligent than what you wrote reflects only on my opinion of what you wrote. Your mini-bio made me chortle and I don't think you're a dolt. So, when your arguments don't follow, it's annoying.
Your pop psychology of my post is way off however. As I have said in other posts on this blog, i have 1 and only 1 agenda; consistent logic. I think the world would be a much better place if we all just stopped and thought things through. Your post did not do that, in my opinion. It's full of hypotheticals, straw men, logical fallacies, and alarmist tripe.
Posting this kind of thing brings out the kool-aid drinkers on both sides and stifles any chance at a real discussion. I come to this site as a place to see, hear, and learn about what people on the right think about a subject that I am passionate about (film). When inferior articles show up, it attracts a different crowd. A more thuggish sort who repeat the attacks, slanders, and unsubstantiated thoughts of bully bloggers. I love Hollywood-Elsewhere, but that site is often insufferable because Jeffery Wells attitude bleeds through to the comment section.
That said, my fears of lowered dialogue have proven unfounded as the vast majority of those posting in this topic have been lucid, amiable, and intelligent.
If I am frustrated with you, it is only because I think that you have a way with words, and a reasonable central point, a point that you bury behind sub-par social criticism.
I saw that and was distressed, as any right thinking person must be at seeing such statistics. However, I would like to see the actual questionnaire. I know the words, Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary, and I know what they do, but it might take me a few minutes to adequately explain it. Many people might understand it, but lack the ability to say it out loud. Or else, they might know the branches as President, Judges, and Congress.
It's only a flaw, or rather an obstacle if we see it as one.
Trust me, there are many, many folks in show biz, in Hollywood even, who are not what is commonly called Liberals with an agenda. Being Liberal is one thing. Being a Liberal with an agenda, one who actively seeks to ruin the careers of those who are not of like-mind, and who seeks to continue our cultural slide into the abyss for their own profit, party or ideology is a whole other creature, indeed.
Folks who do not like what is coming out of Hollywood, and they may very well be Liberal, Conservative, Libertarian, Communists, Foot Fetishists, whatever, if they possess fear that they can never 'get a foot in the door' due to their political views, then I simply offer these two suggestions:
1. Don't state your political views until your foot clears the threshold.
2. Do excellent work.
After that, well, the sky's the limit.
Good luck.
Foot Fetishists? You mean Quentin Tarantino?
Karl, thank you for your right-on-the-money description of the point I was making, and why I chose Woody's work to illustrate it (much to the chagrin of some readers). If only others had your skills, perception, the world would be a better place, indeed.
As for the word choice, well, if people want to be technical and it hurts me to point it out, but…'pierces' is correct, as in, "His shirt had three pierces (three holes), two tears, and one torn-off button, according to his disgruntled wife." It's called word choice and anyone can play.
If you wish to emphasize the act of piercing, well, that's a different matter. I didn't.
I also use g&y to mean happy, and f&ggot to mean a bundle of sticks. Go figure. (spelling edited for moderation
But what concerns me more than my keystrokes is this: if my simple post inspired such a derogatory and obviously emotional reaction and drafting Lovecraft of all people in the fray, it can only mean one thing: it hit home – Big Time – capital B rhymes with T stands for Trouble in Liberal City. And that's marvelous.
By the way, who's a "professional journalist" would-be or otherwise? Perish the thought, my good man. Perish the thought.
Okay. Double post time.
I'm getting your post Schizoid Mann. It just won't show up anywhere except my email for whatever reason…
Anyway. Where did I insult you? I insulted your argument, but we're both adults. You should be able to understand that you are entirely separate from your argument. Saying that I think you're more intelligent than what you wrote reflects only on my opinion of what you wrote. Your mini-bio made me chortle and I don't think you're a dolt. So, when your arguments don't follow, it's annoying.
Your pop psychology of my post is way off however. As I have said in other posts on this blog, i have 1 and only 1 agenda; consistent logic. I think the world would be a much better place if we all just stopped and thought things through. Your post did not do that, in my opinion. It's full of hypotheticals, straw men, logical fallacies, and alarmist tripe.
Posting this kind of thing brings out the kool-aid drinkers on both sides and stifles any chance at a real discussion. I come to this site as a place to see, hear, and learn about what people on the right think about a subject that I am passionate about (film). When inferior articles show up, it attracts a different crowd. A more thuggish sort who repeat the attacks, slanders, and unsubstantiated thoughts of bully bloggers. I love Hollywood-Elsewhere, but that site is often insufferable because Jeffery Wells attitude bleeds through to the comment section.
That said, my fears of lowered dialogue have proven unfounded as the vast majority of those posting in this topic have been lucid, amiable, and intelligent.
If I am frustrated with you, it is only because I think that you have a way with words, and a reasonable central point, a point that you bury behind sub-par social criticism.
Post Script: What's wrong with H.P. Lovecraft? When you describe an entire city as controlled like one sentient monolith it brings to mind 2 things. "Let his blood be upon us! Us and our children!" and The Call of Cthulhu.
[...] Excerpted from:Where Have You Gone, Alvy Singer? [...]
If you were really interested in conversation, you wouldn't come here and insult people. And if you can't tell the difference between an insult and a criticism, then you're just not worth talking to.
As for having an agenda of "consistent logic", I don't see any logic in your posts. I see the emotion. I see anger. I see a closed mind lashing out at others with whom you disagree, for reasons you can't fully explain.
Open your mind, drop the insults and people here will talk to you quite happily.
Okay. Show me an example of what you mean. Because I've been periodically checking back this afternoon, and I don't recall once being angry. Perhaps I've chosen words that didn't quite play how I meant them to.
Honestly. Show me an example, please.
Schizoid, I've been thinking about your article for an hour or so now. I like it, but there is something I would add. I think both teaching and "Hollywood" are endeavors that fall more into the category of "art" than "science." Unfortunately, that means that many of the people who go into these fields just aren't cut out to be in those fields because you can't just follow a how to list.
To protect themselves, these folks created institutions (certifying boards, middlemen (agents), unions) whose main purpose became to make sure that "those who can't" could keep their jobs.
I think liberalism developed secondarily. Unions and certification protected fields tend to attract the risk averse, those who fear entrepreneurship, i.e. liberals. Liberals hire more liberals. Soon liberalism achieves critical mass. Then group think takes over and suddenly you are expected to be a liberal — if you want to work.
Once you get rampant liberalism, you get all of the garbage that you identify in your post, which ruined schools and is ruining Hollywood.
Look at your very first post. You start off by telling him "This is maybe the least intelligent thing I have ever seen posted on the internet." You then finish with "there is no way you are this stupid."
If a teacher said this to you, would you say, "ah, valid criticisms" or would you feel that you had been personally attacked?
Right on the money with the respect aspect. That's a key element mostly absent in American schools today and consequently society. If behavior is learned, like we're told, then where is it learned from?
Lol! Without a doubt.
hmm. I donno that I agree with all of this, but you are on to something here.
Yes. Both of those are specific to this article and this discussion, whereas your comments are directed at me with no framing whatsoever. Also, the comparison to a teacher/student relationship is specious.
But if your goal is only to be a provocateur how are you different from David Bowie? Marylin Manson? or Michael Moore?
It hit home in the sense that I was shocked at the denseness of the poor rhetoric tools couched in what is technically a fairly well written piece.
I would call a Pelosi speech an over long SNL bit…except maybe a bit more funny.
Your writing is not below par. The arguments are. If I didn't think you were at least halfway intelligent, I would not have responded at all.
As for the Cthulhu bit, you talk about a Hollywood agenda as if everyone is in on it and has a 5-year plan going on. And I don't think that's true. If only because some studios would agree to it, then back-stab everyone and go against it to have a market corner all to themselves.
In any case, I want to see your film when it comes out. Do you know when it will start the festival circuit?
Eureka! Progress!
You know, I think I figured out why you felt so strongly about my post. I believe you are under the impression that the logic is flawed. Well, you said as much. But what logic are you referring to, exactly? Do you dispute the facts I listed? Those are facts, not logic? I mean, I love a good syllogism as much the next guy, but I see none in my article.
If you are under the impression that I am making a case that because our schools stink, Hollywood stinks, too, or something like that, you're mistaken. They both do stink, but have mostly achieved an independent "stunkness" all their own. They are related in that Liberals control both education and Hollywood almost completely. How did they do that, as I asked at the outset? How did they take over those vast institutions that were primarily (not politically) conservative in nature, for lack of a better term?
And the answer provides the obvious clue as to how Hollywood can be 'taken back', so to speak, or as I prefer, 'taken forward'.
That's all.
Okay, I think I probably owe you a more full rebuttal since I suppose it is not impossible to read my earlier post as needlessly hostile.
Paragraph 1: Nice hard lead.
P 2: You lay all of this at the feet of Liberals. To unilaterally blame one group, and furthermore to characterize this group as monolithic is naive at best.
Also, I didn't know that commies were materialists. I don't understand this point and its imprecise nature seems like you're just trying to lump the whole Paris Hilton crowd in with the left because they're easy targets.
Where is extra credit being offered for flag burning? And why is flag burning inextricably attached to deriding the troops? Several large jumps here, a straw man, an anecdote, AND yes, alarmist.
"where teachers once encouraged independence, rather than reliance "–actually this point is right on.
"- where we once taught the lessons of history, rather than condemning it"–I donno what you're talking about. I was in high school within the last 5 years and frankly, the picture we were given of the founding fathers, and the nations founding and the whitewashed civil war (pun intended), was all extremely conservative. No discussion of any type of mistreatment of Indians and no promotion of counter culture figures (Other than a tongue-in-cheek student tribute to the YIppies). No '"damn republicans" speeches. And an overt religious angle to my 12th grade year.
Studies on condom use in schools have shown that condoms being available does not cause a rise in teen sex. It just causes a rise in teens who were already having sex using condoms while they are having sex. (Though, it probably does cause a rise in teens using condoms for ballons too.) So if you're against water balloon pranks, you have a point.
I also think it can be described as a lot of other things instead of "Liberals gone wild" because it is juvenile to blame it all on the other party. The right carries burden too. And until we can admit our own shortcomings we are less able to help others overcome theirs.
Looks like I hit a nerve. I should at least receive the Laurence Olivier prize for creative dentistry for inspiring such outrage in so short a time.
Yes, I do believe I got under your skin quite literally, and figuratively, for that matter. You attack the internet, IMDB, and my humble self in your first sentence salvo. Well, we three kings salute you.
Thanks for your input.
Cheers.
I just spent about 35-40 minutes pointing out all of the things I took issue with in your initial post…it said under moderation and now it's gone…if you can see that post…please save it from deletion. I don't think I can repeat it.
You really don't want to get me started on this topic. LOL!
One word for you.
Foucault.
I have yet to meet a liberal without an agenda. Reminds me of the pipsqueak prof I had in college whose classes were mandatory for my major and I'd piss him off every semester by not even buying the books for the class and the spoon-fed the little twerp what he wanted to hear on every type of exam he tried to pull-off and he'd try to trip me up to try to diminish my grade. It was fun for me to verbally bitch-slap the 60s re-tread when he would try and justify giving me a B and we would do the "Academic Review Board Dance" and he would be overturned and would have to give me the A because his argument was always, "But that's not what she believes – she's mocking me!" Whiner! And would, successfully every time, argue, "But, you are such a great professor that I am challenging myself – proof in the pudding – look at my papers, exams, etc." Review board, begrudgingly had to admit that I answer "correctly" [read: liberal] and would give me the A. And then I would laugh myself silly on the way back to the dorm; and turn on Rush and skip the idiot's class just for the heck of it….
There's a great comic mind who posts articles who said that even Bill Maher had no problem working with him as a writer despite his being conservative. And Bill Maher is a crazy lib and not the nicest of guys. So, no, one should never assume. I'm not open about my views for more of the politics and religion reason, but when I have been it hasn't hurt my employment. I even got an anti-Michael Moore joke on network TV. But be careful and tread lightly.
"Good news doesn't sell" is a mantra, period. When I was in high school, very rarely did we get a newspaper to cover some of the community/business activities our DECA chapter worked on. I think my teacher repeated the phrase: "If it bleeds, it leads." Of course, that made us work that much harder until we did get a newspaper that covered us. (And it didn't help that no one knew what DECA was. They still don't.)
I've wanted to write a movie (R-rated but probably a little less profane than some stuff today) about my senior year in DECA but I never managed to get a cohesive plot going.
And it's funny you mention family programing. I'm 26 and there's plenty I enjoy on TV now (30 Rock, Chuck, Galactica, Sarah Connor Chronicles, etc.) but I realize even as recently as the 90s, we had the TGIF lineup (Full House, etc.) and other family sitcoms, and genre shows that weren't non-stop darkness (Sliders, seaQuest, the Star Trek shows, etc.). I'm no prude but sometimes I think to myself, "Wait, we don't have any of that anymore, do we? No wonder people complain so much – there's no balance!"
My good friend Rufus T. Firefly once told me that it's bad manners to name drop.
hhahhaah, indeed. My good friend Marx told me something very similar.
Interesting. Well, I think one thing that gets lost in the shuffle is that academia is primarily Liberal not just due to predisposition but also because of timing.
The 60s radicals had to go somewhere. Many went into the arts, many into academia (far, far fewer got 'real jobs'). So, it's no wonder they dominate in those two places. No wonder at all. As Andrew points out, helping each other stay in those positions once they got in those positions was a cinch. Brotherhood of the Bell and all that. Why do you think conspiracy movies are so well written? Because the writers are often very Liberal and can easily imagine what they would do if given such unbridled power.
Yes, they dominate now. But….
There is hope. Tremendous hope. Like cockroaches, radical Liberals fear the light of day. They fear being shown to the public. They fear being shown for what they are, what they believe in, what they do. And they are getting old. But there must be action, there must be folks willing to go into these fields, to replace these radicals with common sense, thinking individuals, folks not bound by peer pressure or PC. If not, then the indoctrinated that these professors 'taught' over the years will just fill in those slots for another generation or so.
In terms of 'fixing' Hollywood, it's probably easier than academia, but not easy, of course.
The thing here is money. Profit. It's got to be profitable. It's no use thinking in terms of conservative films or liberal films. Just think successful films. Great stories. That's what will win the day, not pigeon holing a film into an ideology. That will only turn folks off.
There is hope. But there must be action.
Likewise, though not pointed toward elementary or secondary education as a career, I see major problems with the kids I see here at the university level. I'm no direct decendant of the bard, Hemingway or any other noted writer, but dang, these kids can's write. I think in Texas they teachers have started what they call "teaching to the test", since everthing is hinged on passing the skills acessment tests. Kids don't pass, the school is on "the list". Too long on the list, heads roll. Obviously building a real foundation for kids to build a lifetime of learning is not happening. I started reading books out of my fathers library accumlated old books as soon as I could pick them up. I'm older than video games and electronic diversions that would have led me to a lifetime of being a kumquat on the couch of life. I agree, smarter spending on education and a reformulation of what and how it's taught.
Yes…and before that he wrote very significant work on the ways that our creation of definitions artificially colors the results of any study using said definitions. Hierarchy of Knowledge, and discourse.
Interesting comment about marketing. From reading about how certain movies and TV shows were developed, the impression I get is that a lot of good ideas get shot down in the marketing stage by guys my age who don't know any better. You know, if a studio can't visualize the poster and ad campaign, they won't make the movie, no matter how good it might be.
Of course, many good movies come and go and audiences find them later… and many bad movies come out, score $$$ on the opening weekend, and are quickly forgotten. I don't know how much market research is actually conducted on behalf of the networks, studios, etc.
Nicely done.
Yeah, weird. They were all in moderation or downright gone! Phantoms.
As for your dislike of my post, well, like I said, it only shows it hit home, doesn't it? Be honest. It made you react. Whether you want to call it too pop or mediocre, or low brow, high brow, middle brow, one long extended brow with corresponding sagittal crest, so be it. The choice is yours to read it, or read into it what you like.
Similarly, and this is really the point, the same case is to be made with Hollywood. It is our choice to view the work (what I call garbage – in most cases) or not to view the work.
If it is not what we want to see or what we want our children watching, then don't support it. Don't spend money on it. I wouldn't buy and read a book that I wasn't interested in just to support reading and literacy!
If you call something like that alarmist, good grief, what would you say to a Pelosi speech? If you call it tripe? Oh, wait a minute, isn't that that really yucky dish made from stomach lining and boiled in a broth? Sorry, no thanks.
But all seriousness aside (with apologies to Steve Allen), insulting others and claiming writing is below par, yet then going on ad infinitum discussing it, or complaining that this perceived incorrectly used word or that word is misspelled, is really a grand ol' waste of time, and I think you know that.
Clearly, you are someone who can do better work than to point out that kind of stuff all day long.
I don't recall describing anything as a sentient monolith. (I wish it was, it could be vanquished more easily) But, I do love H.P.! Bring him in more, please! That IS worth talking about.
Cheers.
Yes. That's why I named artists and writers and didn't name any scientists or mathematicians in the 'Magritte replaced by' section, even though I used the math and science 'alarmist' point of last or near-last on international tests to stress the lowering of our standards compared with our previous levels and those of other nations.
In art, as you know, culture plays a dominant role. So, it is incredibly difficult, if not impossible to measure artistic or literary ability on an international scale. Do we judge Americans on their interpretation of Tale of Genji? Do we judge Japanese on Fitzgerald, on MLK or JFK even? Thank goodness we don't. Because they (Japanese junior high school students) know much more about those Americans than most young Americans do, sadly. ( I recently sat on a judging panel for a speech contest. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address and MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech were chosen and presented by no less than 8 contestants out of 25. Mind you, they were allowed to choose any English speech, article, essay, or short story. And they picked those. I asked them why. Their answers were the things I wish young Americans would say. I didn't have the heart to tell them that most American youth have no clue about those speeches beyond the names.
But honestly, how do we judge, test for art internationally? We can't, really. So, it's no surprise that there are no sanctioned and official international tests for art or literature (that I know of). There are several for mathematics and science for industrialized nations. Hence, the listing of math and science as well as the arts.
As for the institutions, yes, it's true. I agree. But remember, all of our universities, all of our movie studios, were founded by what would be called conservatives today and even religious orders (the schools not the studios!). They have been co-opted as you describe and because the country has been asleep at the wheel.
Thanks a bunch for the thoughtful comment.
No sign of it. But no worries. I think I got your drift. Enough said on this anyway. You can save your objections for my next piece.
Cheers.
Now here's where it gets interesting. I'd love nothing more than to write a script and do the best job I can, not settling for crap +1 (I've read that Rossio/Elliot piece, too).
However, that script might include violence, sex, and other things you talk about in the article. I'll just assume I'm reading it the wrong way but you make it seem like if people do their best work and strive for something greater than what's out there now (which isn't all pornographic) all that stuff will disappear, which isn't true at all. Now granted, there's a world of difference between say, a movie like Taken with bad guys getting what they deserve, versus a piece of crap reality show that seems to exist only to show the worst of society (almost anything they make fun of on The Soup could fall into this category).
That's just me and again, I might just be reading into things. How could people name their favorite movies on one of Nolte's top 5 threads which often include films with content you complain about, then complain that there's too much of that content in movies and on TV? Is it context? Is it saturation?
Foucault died of an AIDS-related illness in Paris on 25 June, 1984.
Very instructive, thanks.
Hucbald of St. Amand.
You must be logged in to post a comment.