Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@ Valderrama
I agree with you. The current direction is unsustainable. But reaching this point was somewhat inevitable. While humans have the facility to be caring, friendly, sharing, helpful and all the other so-called positive traits, we're also greedy and selfish. Unfortunately it is nearly always the case that the greedy and selfish win out because the friendly, caring people don't want to rock the boat while the greedy and selfish don't care. So we've been heading in this direction since the beginning. The current state of affairs (as described by the Doughnut Economics video) of neoliberal economics, as ushered in by Thatcher and Reagan – and coninued by Blair, Clinton and all those around the world that either jumped on board or were cajoled, bribed or blackmailed to join in – is a kind of heightenend version of that and is epitomised by consumerism and the idea of continued growth that you point to. And indeed, there does not seem to be any large enough group of people in a position of power willing to challenge it.
In my opinion we face and will inevitably experience the breakdown of society as it currently exits and see billions of people die over the next hundred years – through climate change, lack of resources, lack of food and water, and the concomitant wars that will follow. Am I being overly dramatic. I guess my grandson will find out.
I'm not familiar with doughnut economics but I watched the set of videos to which the article pointed and it seems to me it's heavily based in socialism – but I guess updated for the current climate. It makes sense to me, but the videos didn't seem to offer practical solutions only a theory. However, I'm a big believer that theories are a good place to start. The videos talk about sustinability (though without using that word), distribution and resdistribution of wealth, sensible use of the commons to everyone's advantage and engaging in personal economic common sense (i.e. living within your means and dialling way back on the consumerism).
Personally I live like that to a fair degree and would like to move further in that direction. I think a really big change could be made if we start by changing the emphasis in education – but that has to go hand in hand with a sincere adoption of new lifestyles by those who have already left education. I would see people
– learning to grow their own food, and raise their own livestock (if meat is what you're in to – though a surge towards vegetarianism is really what's required at the moment)
– walking, cycling and using public transport rather than having personal motorised vehicles, whether fossil or electric
– working and trading within smaller communities
– valuing work more equitably
– community ownership of the commons
– more cooperatives
– and so on.
However, even though much of this will be forced on us, there will still be selfish, greedy individuals who won't play and they will most likely be the ones with the guns. So, well we all know what that means.
@ Norman – Fantastic post! Thanks for taking the time and effort. There's so much here to work with. However, I've been down that road so many times it's like banging your head against a very dense brick wall because regarding "lack of arguments and persuasive power", whenever I try that with people who match your self-description, by putting forward intelligent arguments drawing on the academic literature that I read day in and day out and avoiding reference to the press and TV news, both of which are over-rated and too narrowly focused to see the big picture, their response is that I'm acting like I think I'm better and more intelligent. It's a no-win situation. By what you've expressed in your post you're quite clearly all the things you claim to see in the people you describe on the left.
As for you feeling insulted by my suggestion that you get over yourself: seriously, quit whining, get over it.
@ JERO
I've been thinking about how to respond to your post – but I still can't imagine how to do it without getting into another long post. lol.
Palmer was always my favourite of the three – I never really got on that well with ELP. A few tracks are great, but mostly … meh. I saw Palmer with his current trio (guitar, bass, drums) four or five years ago and they played the best version of Tarkus I've ever heard – really vital and vibrant.
I always used to say to my Beatles-loving friends, they were great, groundbreaking and all that, but Yes took it all to a much higher level. Like MP respecting Yes et al. Jon Anderson and especially Chris Squire really respected The Beatles. But the bands that follow always have the opportunity to take what their forebears did and run with it. It's only a few special ones who actually do.
These days I find it a little pointless to compare the bands I love and consider real greats. There are three bands in my life that really have my heart like no other – Yes, Solstice (little-known British folk-prog est. 1980s) and MP. Who knows why we love the bands we do, or why we think they're head and shoulders above others as far as our personal feelings are concerned (though I could make a good case in all three instances). I'm just thankful I found MP while I'm still able to appreciate them and I plan on appreciating the shit out of them as much as I can.
Tomas just announced that WERL are playing again at Moving Noises Festival in Bochum, DE on 2 February 2019. He's also playing a solo cymbal set!
I listened to DDU this afternoon (the whole thing of course; I'm not one for cherry picking tracks very often), and finally made it through to the synth solo at 5.19 of Into the Mystic. I agree completely – it sounds totally like Topographic Oceans era Yes/Wakeman. Well spotted!
@ Norman_Gold:
Quote:Which comes as no surprise though. People on the opposite spectrum of Rand's thinking naturally consider themselves as superior in every way.This is very interesting. I was just today reviewing a talk about how people in positions of power manipulate discourse to make it appear as if they are the victims. Currently in the USA, Trump is doing this by making men look as if they are victims of women and citizens the victims of immigrants. It's an insidious technique that is used by the powerful whether they are politically of the right or the left. In particular it is used by those who hold or support an extreme or authoritarian position when they feel threatened.
What strikes me here is that you have taken offence at supernaut's criticism of Ayn Rand's thinking and have used this to put forward a classic argument that the person making the criticism somehow thinks they are superior, whereas all supernaut has done is voice an opinion. Your use of the expressions "no surprise" and "naturally" adds weight to the idea that Ayn Rand supporters are always being treated like this, and that they are victims. Assuming you are a believer or follower of Ayn Rand's ideas, I would suggest you push that bottom lip in, wipe the tears away, and get over yourself – your lot are doing quite well at the moment.
PS. I will add that my understanding of supernaut's usage of the word "wrong" was idiomatic – i.e. it coincides with the way it is defined in the urban dictionary: "What one says to oneself or to a companion upon seeing something perpetrated by another that is disturbing, distressing, or just plain nasty." This does not imply that Ayn Rand's ideas are incorrect. In this context, I understood supernaut to voice an opinion of something s/he doesn't like. I don't see anything bad about doing that. No doubt supernaut will correct me if I'm wrong (by which I mean -if my interpretation of her/his usage of "wrong" is incorrect).
PPS:
Pray your leaders are the wisest of men
Pray they're not so easily riled
Pray they seek concord and never go looking for fights
Pray their aim is to reconcile
@ TAF – I'm sorry to say my name has no intentional connection with KC. Just a coincidence. I like the way you think though. I saw them too a couple of years ago. They were incredible. It was so expensive though that I didn't imagine I'd go again, but this year a friend wanted to go and he wants me to go with him. So …
I'll give another listen to Into the Mystic. I'll listen out for the Yes influence.
YES! supernaut nails it – that section in Mutiny is Changes by Yes. I knew it the first time I heard it. In fact I was a little disappointed that they "ripped it off", but that was in my early days of listening to MP. I now have a much better understanding of their playful quoting and paying homage to their favourite bands. It's not ripping off at all – unlike so many prog bands these days who just seem to be prog wannabees (B O R I N G). To me there's a big difference between prog (which I see as like a genre with particular tropes and sounds) and being progressive, which is moving forward, ever-inspoired and alert to new possibilities instead of being stuck in a 70s Genesis/Yes/Crimson/Floyd soundalike timewarp. MP are definitely not a prog band (IMHO), but a progressive band – they progress, they don't stand still, they're a truly creative force. (I could write a bloody thesis on prog vs progressive – lol)
@supernaut – I also admire and love the Geddy/Alex/Neil friendship – it's very special, and rare in rock music. I see the same in Bent and Snah. Feedback is the other Rush album I was reminded of while listening to Child of the Future this last week or so, except of course Child is all original material.
When I first heard Rush (All the World's a Stage) I thought "Zeppelin wannabees". Then I heard Farewell and thought "Yes wannabees". During the 70s they always seemed to be a couple of years behind the wave, but as the 70s ended they had progressed to the point of being in the vanguard among the the prog bands who were trying to deal with the upheaval caused by punk. In that repect they had the advantage of not being British because in Britain punk was waging a very vocal war with prog and briefly it won. In my last high school years (1978-80) you were treated like a pariah if you continued to like prog, even if like me you also liked punk. The British prog bands were all knocked off balance, which was not a bad thing and in the 80s they reinvented themselves, becoming progressive again (except the Gilmour-led Floyd – who sound like an 80s Floyd wannabee band). Rush however, showed their progressive skills and by Permanent Waves somehow managed to write concise epics – Jacob's Ladder being the greatest example IMHO. By the mid-80s though I think they just jumped on a fashion bandwagon with those bloody 80s drums and rolled-up sleeves! Anyway … I digress.
By the way, supernaut, the word you were searching for is "impersonal".
@TAF – Nice spot with the X-1 and X-3 connection, And I'll definitely have to listen more closely to the LLM and Cygnus X-1 lyrics as there are times when sonically LLM reminds me a little of Cygnus X-1 Book II.
As for the Crimson conenction – well to me it's loud and clear in The Tower – especially the recent live versions of The Tower. And coincidentally, while The Tower was the last song I saw perfomred live (Drammen), Crimson will be my next gig
@otherdemon I don't think I've seen either of those videos – I'm not a big music video fan to be honest, though I've seen some of the MP ones during the last several months – and last week I met up with an old friend in Oslo who worked with Kim Hiorthøy back in day on some of their video output. I also don't have and have never seen Haircuts – hopefully one day a copy will find its way to me somehow. As for the 80s fashion choices – nooooooooooooo! In that regard, MP were lucky to have been a band that started after all that bollocks had passed.
@supernaut I became a Rush fan in about 79, and saw them that year and in 80 and 81. After Hold Your Fire I lost touch altogether as, like you I guess, I thought they really went downhill. I picked up again many many years later and saw their last two European tours, which were great, but Geddy's voice was not. I guess my faves are AFTK, Permanent Waves and Moving Pics.
During the last week there has been a great debate on a Prog Magazine Facebook thread regarding Peart's lyrics – some strong opinions in both directions
Some of his lyrics hot the spot for me; but some are clumsy and clunky and the early Ayn Rand-inspired stuff is politically questionable IMHO – moreover, he's no Dylan or Joni Mitchell, that's for sure. I have to admit to having been a great fan of his drumming though.I absolutely agree regarding the bass players you mention and how Bent seems to fit that mould. But indeed there is not the same cheeky nod to Rush like there is to many other bands (Sabs, Velvet Underground, Allman Bros, Joni Mitchell, Sonic Youth, etc.). Great pick-up on the Rockfield Studios link – I didn't know that.
Andrew Scheps' six favourite songs:
@ supernaut. Don't worry, you're not the only dork. I was starting to wonder why nobody had mentioned it.
EDIT: D'oh – just realised you made reference to it in your first post in the thread!
Maybe there just aren't any blacksmiths here.
I thought nemesis was a reference to problems with laying down the vocal tracks. Though maybe these first hashtag are all track names.
This was the post:
#nemesis
#gluttonforpunishment
#triumfdesvillens
#dowhatthouwilt
#viljensmakt
#redlightsyndrome
#dilletantenesinntogsmarsj
#thistooshallpass
#pushingit #eyesbiggerthanbelly
#wayoutsidemycomfortzone
#vocals #singing #studio #u87 #neumann #neve #sunn0))) #hiwatt
@stavemguitars #vintagegear
recording the next @motorpsychoband album
in @monnowvalleystudio with #andrewscheps and #deathprod producing. proging up a storm!
@tomasjarmyr #snah #tos @officialsammakar @c.marinho96
Further thought about the gig.
The sound for Elephant9 was perfect, and I was standing quite close for them. There was absolutely no need to turn it up so much when MP took the stage. It was so loud that at times I momentarily felt a loss of balance. But … I really should remember to take my earplugs to MP gigs and use them. I just avoid it because after years and years of going to gigs I am just not used to using them. I think maybe the performance was better then I felt simply because the sound did not allow me to hear properly.
I started the gig at the front left. My first chance to see Bent close up. That was incredible. After really getting my freak on during STG ( ðŸ˜ðŸ¤ªðŸ˜³ðŸ˜²ðŸ˜€ ) I moved back to about 12th row. The sound was slightly better there. For the encore I headed up to the balcony, which was much easier on my ears.
Highlights for me were STG (yes, the outro was brilliant), Dream Home, The Wheel.
Next time I'll bring the earplugs.
