Hi,
sharke ... Pedro I know you think that we're all too narrow minded and/or conditioned to appreciate your sublime theories on art and philosophy, but the reality is that you seem to use these discussions as a springboard into pre-baked tangential diatribes which passive-aggressively put everyone down. ...
This just shows how inacurate you are "measuring" me. If that were so, music that we discuss in favorites and this and that, and Craig shows more listening than I do even, then any band I mention would be ignored.
It's even far more weird, that you call it "theories on art and philosophy" when I will be the very first to tell you that I have none. NONE. Why? I know, that the next book, film, song, or comment on the Coffee House can very easily influence, and "change" my own view ... which to me is an ever changing concept ... it has no beginning or end ... all we know is the middle that we live in ... a sort of cosmological view since no one can even agree on the universe's beginning, or it's possible end ... but we're here during it's life!
That is the closest I can express my own ideas and abilities. The only problem, is that I don't seem to forget these things, if I'm drunk, stoned, sick, or half dead ... all of it is "felt" and somehow "understood" and fitting into my experience. Now, I can not tell you which side of that experience is analog and which is digital ... it's a redundant question!
sharke ... Now I'm not going to give you too much of a hard time about that because I have a very good friend who does exactly the same thing....
Did you ever consider that those folks might have a point?
Harry Nilson did!
(haha!!!)
Please ... here you are saying that you know that people have different views, but because you don't understand them, you are not sure how you feel about it.
sharke ... On the flimsiest of cues he's attacking other people's innocently expressed opinions and using them as a platform for a lecture on how everyone is conditioned to think like sheep and how if only we'd open our minds more (i.e. read the same literature/visit the same websites he does) then we'd start to appreciate just how frustrating it is to have such a kaleidoscopic intellect in a sea of brainwashed buffoons. ...
You might consider reading Robert Penn Warren. You are mis-representing the notion of sheep badly and confusing them with brainwashed buffoons!
sharke Case in point - a perfectly innocent discussion about the respective qualities of analog and digital formats results in you lamenting everyone's socialist conditioning, as ridiculous as that is.
I used an example, with a parallel for this discussion by using Bit's example.
You either declined to see that, or could not accept that difference. You could have said ... I didn't really see that, instead of spending time commenting on something that I am not about, and would not waste my time in, otherwise.
Sharke, that's kinda mean and personal!
It was like saying that the "effects" (as Bit showed) were better analog, than they were when digital, and I can agree to that on an emotional level since it was my time and place, but I disagree on a reality level, with one exception ... today's use of these "effects", is to convince you that they are more "real" than we know or can imagine ... and I do not think that the "analog" stuff, originally, was done for that reason alone ... it would render "L'Age D'or" and "Un Chien Andalou" the stupidest things ever done, and that was analog, but the images were so outrageous that no one could believe them! As opposed to a horror film where it might scare you in how it's done and this helps you score the girl with!
If you are not sure what I mean, please ask. But automatically assume that all I do is trash you guys, is getting boring, repetitive, and pathetically sick! It's not even original anymore!
Can't you compose a better song? Or is it all the same in the end?