Hah Hah!  Man that happens to me quite a lot here.

You have the general gist of what I was saying though.  Really I'm
trying to pin down what we mean when we say love.

Is love for the family the same as love for the blues?

I mean I can certianly say 'man I love the blues' and not many people
would not understand what I mean when I say it, is it love though or
am I simply missusing the word?

On 15 July, 12:25, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
> I just can't seem to follow your logic.  I understand that it is
> linear - love for family = love for blues= love for violence.  I think
> that love is more dimensional, and those would not equate.  I
> especially question "love" for violence, and think it is probably
> confusing love with some other emotion or compulsion.  Ultimately, the
> sage loves all of life and love is all there is.  From that point of
> view, the same may be said of the beautiful.  But upon closer
> examination, we delineate.
>
> On Jul 15, 6:17 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Well now Molly, I do not belive I offered a Straw man at all there?
>
> > My comparison is there to try and pin down what we mean when we say
> > love.  I offered my love for my family as the base and said that if it
> > could be said that my feelings for my family are the same as my
> > feelings for the blues, then it can be said that I love the blues.
>
> > Okay sorta strawmanish I admit but only if it can be shown that my
> > feelings for the blues are not like my feelings for my family.
>
> > I fail to see how my abohorance for violence means I cannot compare
> > love and hate though?
>
> > On 10 July, 22:01, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Your pondering, you made up a fantasy situation to base a comparison
> > > that cannot therefore be real.  Straw man argument.  If you do not
> > > "love" violence, you cannot compare the two.
>
> > > On Jul 10, 9:53 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > I think I have only one word my dearest Molly that can sum up my
> > > > thoughts on this post of your.
>
> > > > Huh?
>
> > > > On 10 July, 14:32, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Then, I guess you are a straw man off to see the wizard...
>
> > > > > On Jul 10, 9:17 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > There is point to be made there I think Molly.  Perhaps along with
> > > > > > what is evil we may have to try to sort out the qeustion of what is
> > > > > > Love.
>
> > > > > > I can say with fear of contridiction that I love my wife and my
> > > > > > children and my parents and my siblings.  what of my love for the
> > > > > > blues though?
>
> > > > > > Can it be said to be love?  If it can then if I declare that my
> > > > > > feelings for the blues are exaclty the same as my feelings about 
> > > > > > being
> > > > > > involved in violence, then I guess we can also call that love and 
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > deviant compulsion?
>
> > > > > > Note here that I do not love violence, in fact the opposite is true 
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > quite abhor it.
>
> > > > > > On 10 July, 13:50, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Is it really love in those cases, Lee, or something more along the
> > > > > > > lines of deviant compulsion?  Both examples would certainly fall
> > > > > > > outside of the "love is patient, love is kind..." definition.
>
> > > > > > > I think that love and beauty have much in common, as they move us 
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > spirit, or to higher consciousness.
>
> > > > > > > On Jul 10, 5:12 am, "[email protected]" 
> > > > > > > <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Surly any type of love is a beautiful thing?  Umm unless it is
> > > > > > > > peadophilic love, or love of violence.  Okay okay scracth that 
> > > > > > > > one,
> > > > > > > > bad Idea.
>
> > > > > > > > Yeah Dipu what do you mean?
>
> > > > > > > > On 10 July, 00:15, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > International communication can be very difficult.  Can you 
> > > > > > > > > please
> > > > > > > > > explain how your reply to Molly's post is relevant??
>
> > > > > > > > > You are replying to a post that poses pertinent wording about 
> > > > > > > > > beauty
> > > > > > > > > and concept but which excludes any reference to love.
>
> > > > > > > > > So what do you mean by "any type of love"??
>
> > > > > > > > > Please explain.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Jul 9, 2:16 pm, dipu banerjee <[email protected]> 
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > >  any type of love
>
> > > > > > > > > > On 7/10/09, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Boring beauty.  Quiet a concept.  Can beauty be boring?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 9, 9:03 am, archytas <[email protected]> 
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Einstein and others drew relativity from obscure 
> > > > > > > > > > > > experiments to glean
> > > > > > > > > > > > the size of molecules and the movement of pollen grains 
> > > > > > > > > > > > in solution.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Beauty tends to fit with experiment and eventual 
> > > > > > > > > > > > communication beyond
> > > > > > > > > > > > the almost non-verbal beholder's eye.  It may well bore 
> > > > > > > > > > > > most people
> > > > > > > > > > > > and end up being taught in school chemistry.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 July, 20:23, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> 
> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps another case of beauty being in the eye of 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the beholder.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Music of a particular artist may require relativity 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > of taste.  Music
> > > > > > > > > > > > > as an art form, absolutely beautiful.  There are a 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > hell of alot of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > people who found Jackson's work beautiful, as 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > evidenced in hundreds of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > thousands, if not millions of people all over the 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > world dancing and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > singing his music after he died.  How many people in 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > your lifetime
> > > > > > > > > > > > > could evoke such a global response, opinion aside.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 8, 3:57 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ian really, the Caravaggio comparison is pertinent 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > but only in the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > context of that era and Jackson in this era.  
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Equally they crossed
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > line, creating a frenzy of mind boggling spectacle. 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >  I must say that
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > your comment "Michael Jackson produced a lot of 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > popular PRODUCT, but
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > very little art." is indeed a consequence of tunnel 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > vision.  Of
> > > > > > > > > > > course
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > if you can produce evidence of another artist that 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > issued such
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > extraordinary talent preceding that of Jackson, I, 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > as well as others,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > would concede to your view.  I personally have no 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > interest, never
> > > > > > > > > > > had,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the Jackson attraction.  I am only motivated by 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > your lack of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > recognition of the innovation, regardless of the 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > underlying product
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > value, of such motivation in artistic influence as 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > well as the perks
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > within the industry (for the sharks).  Art is 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > something of a misnomer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in that people will and are paying thousands of 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > dollars for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > contemporary "Graffiti" art, which for me as an 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > artist styled in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Renaissance period art view as pure "garbage".  So 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in that sense,
> > > > > > > > > > > your
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > view of Micheal Jackson as less than an art form is 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > reflective of
> > > > > > > > > > > your
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > lack of understanding what "art" is all about.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 8, 2:19 am, Ian Pollard 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2009/7/7 frantheman <[email protected]>
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Behind all the weirdness (perhaps even 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > perversion) and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the disgusting commercial hype surrounding his 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > death, that was
> > > > > > > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael Jackson was at his best. There have 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > been other similar
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > artistic wonders throughout history - 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caravaggio comes to mind.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you just compare Michael Jackson to 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Caravaggio? :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whilst I think there is much artistic merit in 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > music, I think it is
> > > > > > > > > > > almost
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always missing from the mainstream. Michael 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jackson produced a lot
> > > > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > popular PRODUCT, but very little art. He also 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > understood, for a
> > > > > > > > > > > time, how to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > market that product as good as anyone. This was 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > made remarkably
> > > > > > > > > > > easier by
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the team of people around him. The album 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Thriller', whilst a good
> > > > > > > > > > > album,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > initially looked to have only been a minor hit 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for him. The first
> > > > > > > > > > > single,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'The Girl Is Mine', did okay, but didn't set the 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > world on fire.
> > > > > > > > > > > However,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > over the next three years Jackson marketed the 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hell out of that
> > > > > > > > > > > album. He
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bled it dry, releasing nine songs from it. And of 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > course, that
> > > > > > > > > > > $500,000
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > video (which he did not choreograph, by the way) 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was a stroke of
> > > > > > > > > > > marketing
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > genius.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To call Michael Jackson an artist deeply devalues 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the word. I don't
> > > > > > > > > > > just say
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that because I am a music snob (I freely admit I 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > am and that it is
> > > > > > > > > > > a factor
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > here). I think the roles of the musician and 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > artist are almost
> > > > > > > > > > > always in a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > state of conflict; such is the nature of a 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > creative person peddling
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > commodities (CDs, etc) and being subjected to 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > commercial pressure.
> > > > > > > > > > > However,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the continuing decline of the music 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > industry's business
> > > > > > > > > > > model --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > coupled with the reduced cost of home
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to