I was thinking about dance as you were discussing athletics & what women can do, and thought of that old joke, or not joke, saying--Ginger Rogers did everything Fred Astaire did, but backwards and in heels. And in ballet--men don't go on point. They CAN, but won't ever be as quick or good as women at that. But that's just sort of an aside--since that was my life for years & years. But also in relation to what Shaenah was saying about ballet and the over focus on virtuosic technique at a young age--I've been thinking about Balanchine, and if you look at his 1960 ballets--the old ones on youtube such as Agon or 4 temperaments with people like Arthur Mitchell, then take a look at newer videos of the same ballets, and you see that that focus on virtuosity actually changes and in a strange way flattens the original piece. It makes it actually LESS astonishing, and more of a spectacle. I've been thinking about why that is, and there is something about infantilism and denial of humanity in it...but I haven't worked out what that is.
Also it's interesting to note--(another aside) Moby Dick--written in the 1850s and the crew of the Pequod is very "diverse" (a word I've grown to hate). But true and not fake.
Wonderful podcast, a lot of what's going on now I feel is this deep, strange relationship to "belief" and how people are now being forced to act without any kind of way to contemplate and figure out reality. So there's an inherent dishonesty that you're forced into in almost every interaction. It's wearying.
I often reference Balanchine, because he was such a strange unique figure in 20th century art. On some level he was this avatar of sacrifice. Americans love virtuosity. I lived with a dancer for a time, and also worked for a dance company for a while in NY --- when i was like 19. Anyway, im sure your are on to something regards this infantilism and virtuosity ... https://www.the-tls.co.uk/arts/dance/virtuosic-reversals and, mitchell was quite something https://youtu.be/w7sKrI5daZM?si=4I-PIgjNDAwWc_gW
yes that pas de deux is one of my favorite parts of Agon!
I also love virtuosity--lord knows I spent years pursuing it, and one of the things about the "participation aesthetic" as you put it in a blog post (which is the other trend in dance), is that people are discouraged from extending themselves at all, which you have to do to be an artist. But I think what I'm talking about with today's sort of hyper-virtuosity is that there's something going on mentally in dancers like Arthur Mitchell, and the Soviet ballet dancers too, of that era, that is visible, and you don't see it in today's dancers so much. It's like Balanchine dancers were almost doing math onstage. The notion of sacrifice has something to do with it too--and, opposed to that is careerism, and MFA training, which is about careers now.
But this is a revealing article that highlights what I might call the American ideology. The writer finds it hard to understand Vidal and then figures out that Vidal “doesn’t view individual rights and freedom like most Americans do. He has more of a social democratic or democratic socialist approach to how looks at politics, rights, and freedom. He was as far to the left as Henry Wallace who ran for President for the Progressive Party back in 1948, Senator George McGovern, who ran for President three times for the Democratic Party, or Senator Bernie Sanders today.”
“Far to the Left”! How so?
“....when Gore Vidal talks about rights and freedom, he means the right not to go without the basic essentials in life. The right not to starve. The right not to want. The right to health care and health insurance. The right to housing.”
And these are “(t)he rights for people to be taken care of instead of everyone going out there and making their own way in life and creating their own individual freedom for themselves.”
To be concerned about such paltry matters as food, water, clothing, housing etc. is to “want to be taken care of” instead of “going out there and making (your) own way in life and creating (your) own individual freedom for (yourself).”
Maybe all this derives ultimately from the Bible – only with a blasphemous solipsistic slant. Each of us is God, creating the whole world for ourselves individually!
And obviously there isn’t the slightest shred of any thought here whatsoever!
Shaenah made a comment regarding Israel, the genocide, and the vax at about 12 minutes in. This is what I'm wondering: is anyone talking about the medical experimentation performed on Israelis during the vax roll out? Children's Health Defense had a reporter in Israel to cover this. The damage must have been immense and could have been part of the preparation for this most recent iteration of blood thirst. Here's one link out of many. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/israeli-ministry-health-pfizer/
Max, I get text's every few hours from the dems and I have not voted for a democrat since Obama's first term and even then was NOT signed up as democrat.
The transgender thing is flabbergasting to me. That “The Science” now declares Iman Khelif to be biologically male is not merely something that everyone “already guessed” but was screamingly obvious to anyone who looked even from the start. So much so that I have to ask: Why the hell are we even talking about this?
And to expand on my comment that a large part of the transgenderism meme is pure diversion, I have noticed that it is often the side that is ostensibly against the trans notion that in fact most stridently promotes it. Thus I noted that certain twitter accounts spend their time pushing the most idiotic rubbish and then inviting the reader to blow off steam – which I dutifully do, only to realise eventually that what I am reacting against is something I’d never even have noticed were it not for the supposedly anti-trans voices pushing it in my face.
There is a British right wing tabloid rag called “The Daily Mail” that always specialised in reactionary baiting re: those “trendy Leftists” and the fact that this publication is now focussing on deserved targets shouldn’t blind you to the fact that they are still playing the same game of provocation.
But I said before that transgenderism as a meme has been relentlessly promoted throughout the media for a long time now. The political drama “Designated Survivor” featured a trans character called Sasha Booker played by the “real life trans” Jamie Clayton. Clayton’s past, typically, is treated in totally nebulous fashion. “Her” Wikipedia page constantly refers to Clayton as a “she” and doesn’t even mention that Clayton is a “trans woman” until the “Personal Life” section almost half way down. In “Designated Survivor” the way Kiefer Sutherland’s president character spoke to Sasha was the very soul of pedantic verbal tightrope walking. One curiously ironic effect of all this is that I could feel no sense of sexuality whatsoever from Clayton.
The latest idiocy I read concerning trans was a headline that suggested that more straight men should date transwoman to combat prejudice! It’s bad enough to suggest straight men date other men. But imagine suggesting that straight men date men who claim to be women and who will have tantrums if contradicted!
Shaenah mentioned Cardi B so I checked her out. Well what can I say to this?:
“I don't wanna spit, I wanna gulp
I wanna gag, I wanna choke
I want you to touch that lil' dangly thing that swing in the back of my throat”
From one tweet, it seems that choking women is apparently “in”. And once again it is the purportedly “progressive” side that has suffered some strange regression.
Another thought on the US election: the media build up seemed to try its damndest to inspire as much ill feeling and belligerent division as possible. And this might be the key to the whole thing. They can’t be sure who will get in but they can try their best to ensure that, no matter who it is, there will be vast reams of fury raked up over it.
As a Scot myself, I'm perplexed as to what George offers to the conversation. I've watched AE since the start - drawn in by my admiration for Cory Morningstar. In other words, I'm not a troll!
I'm not sure what you mean. "As a Scot"? Am I not "Scottish" enough?
I simply offer views on what seems important to me. If you think what I'm saying is trivial or irrelevant then I'd be grateful if you could give me guidelines.
I acknowledge freely that the other speakers know far more about lots of topics I am ignorant of. What I comment on is tricks of propaganda and the entire transformation of the rhetorical landscape since covid.
I am also increasingly fascinated by the reactionary non-Marxist "critique" that is being offered up everywhere which I intend to expand on.
If you think I ought to be talking about something else then let me know.
If, on the other hand, you feel aversion to my physical appearance then I know your pain.
I was thinking about dance as you were discussing athletics & what women can do, and thought of that old joke, or not joke, saying--Ginger Rogers did everything Fred Astaire did, but backwards and in heels. And in ballet--men don't go on point. They CAN, but won't ever be as quick or good as women at that. But that's just sort of an aside--since that was my life for years & years. But also in relation to what Shaenah was saying about ballet and the over focus on virtuosic technique at a young age--I've been thinking about Balanchine, and if you look at his 1960 ballets--the old ones on youtube such as Agon or 4 temperaments with people like Arthur Mitchell, then take a look at newer videos of the same ballets, and you see that that focus on virtuosity actually changes and in a strange way flattens the original piece. It makes it actually LESS astonishing, and more of a spectacle. I've been thinking about why that is, and there is something about infantilism and denial of humanity in it...but I haven't worked out what that is.
Also it's interesting to note--(another aside) Moby Dick--written in the 1850s and the crew of the Pequod is very "diverse" (a word I've grown to hate). But true and not fake.
Wonderful podcast, a lot of what's going on now I feel is this deep, strange relationship to "belief" and how people are now being forced to act without any kind of way to contemplate and figure out reality. So there's an inherent dishonesty that you're forced into in almost every interaction. It's wearying.
I often reference Balanchine, because he was such a strange unique figure in 20th century art. On some level he was this avatar of sacrifice. Americans love virtuosity. I lived with a dancer for a time, and also worked for a dance company for a while in NY --- when i was like 19. Anyway, im sure your are on to something regards this infantilism and virtuosity ... https://www.the-tls.co.uk/arts/dance/virtuosic-reversals and, mitchell was quite something https://youtu.be/w7sKrI5daZM?si=4I-PIgjNDAwWc_gW
yes that pas de deux is one of my favorite parts of Agon!
I also love virtuosity--lord knows I spent years pursuing it, and one of the things about the "participation aesthetic" as you put it in a blog post (which is the other trend in dance), is that people are discouraged from extending themselves at all, which you have to do to be an artist. But I think what I'm talking about with today's sort of hyper-virtuosity is that there's something going on mentally in dancers like Arthur Mitchell, and the Soviet ballet dancers too, of that era, that is visible, and you don't see it in today's dancers so much. It's like Balanchine dancers were almost doing math onstage. The notion of sacrifice has something to do with it too--and, opposed to that is careerism, and MFA training, which is about careers now.
On attempting to find that Gore Vidal essay relating to abortion I believe there is a snippet of it on this link:
https://thenewdemocrat1975.com/2017/10/27/the-bully-pulpit-jr-benjamin-gore-vidal-rioting-in-understatement/
But this is a revealing article that highlights what I might call the American ideology. The writer finds it hard to understand Vidal and then figures out that Vidal “doesn’t view individual rights and freedom like most Americans do. He has more of a social democratic or democratic socialist approach to how looks at politics, rights, and freedom. He was as far to the left as Henry Wallace who ran for President for the Progressive Party back in 1948, Senator George McGovern, who ran for President three times for the Democratic Party, or Senator Bernie Sanders today.”
“Far to the Left”! How so?
“....when Gore Vidal talks about rights and freedom, he means the right not to go without the basic essentials in life. The right not to starve. The right not to want. The right to health care and health insurance. The right to housing.”
And these are “(t)he rights for people to be taken care of instead of everyone going out there and making their own way in life and creating their own individual freedom for themselves.”
To be concerned about such paltry matters as food, water, clothing, housing etc. is to “want to be taken care of” instead of “going out there and making (your) own way in life and creating (your) own individual freedom for (yourself).”
Maybe all this derives ultimately from the Bible – only with a blasphemous solipsistic slant. Each of us is God, creating the whole world for ourselves individually!
And obviously there isn’t the slightest shred of any thought here whatsoever!
Shaenah made a comment regarding Israel, the genocide, and the vax at about 12 minutes in. This is what I'm wondering: is anyone talking about the medical experimentation performed on Israelis during the vax roll out? Children's Health Defense had a reporter in Israel to cover this. The damage must have been immense and could have been part of the preparation for this most recent iteration of blood thirst. Here's one link out of many. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/israeli-ministry-health-pfizer/
Max, I get text's every few hours from the dems and I have not voted for a democrat since Obama's first term and even then was NOT signed up as democrat.
The transgender thing is flabbergasting to me. That “The Science” now declares Iman Khelif to be biologically male is not merely something that everyone “already guessed” but was screamingly obvious to anyone who looked even from the start. So much so that I have to ask: Why the hell are we even talking about this?
And to expand on my comment that a large part of the transgenderism meme is pure diversion, I have noticed that it is often the side that is ostensibly against the trans notion that in fact most stridently promotes it. Thus I noted that certain twitter accounts spend their time pushing the most idiotic rubbish and then inviting the reader to blow off steam – which I dutifully do, only to realise eventually that what I am reacting against is something I’d never even have noticed were it not for the supposedly anti-trans voices pushing it in my face.
There is a British right wing tabloid rag called “The Daily Mail” that always specialised in reactionary baiting re: those “trendy Leftists” and the fact that this publication is now focussing on deserved targets shouldn’t blind you to the fact that they are still playing the same game of provocation.
But I said before that transgenderism as a meme has been relentlessly promoted throughout the media for a long time now. The political drama “Designated Survivor” featured a trans character called Sasha Booker played by the “real life trans” Jamie Clayton. Clayton’s past, typically, is treated in totally nebulous fashion. “Her” Wikipedia page constantly refers to Clayton as a “she” and doesn’t even mention that Clayton is a “trans woman” until the “Personal Life” section almost half way down. In “Designated Survivor” the way Kiefer Sutherland’s president character spoke to Sasha was the very soul of pedantic verbal tightrope walking. One curiously ironic effect of all this is that I could feel no sense of sexuality whatsoever from Clayton.
The latest idiocy I read concerning trans was a headline that suggested that more straight men should date transwoman to combat prejudice! It’s bad enough to suggest straight men date other men. But imagine suggesting that straight men date men who claim to be women and who will have tantrums if contradicted!
Shaenah mentioned Cardi B so I checked her out. Well what can I say to this?:
“I don't wanna spit, I wanna gulp
I wanna gag, I wanna choke
I want you to touch that lil' dangly thing that swing in the back of my throat”
From one tweet, it seems that choking women is apparently “in”. And once again it is the purportedly “progressive” side that has suffered some strange regression.
Max's experience is exactly mine - and I live in a blue state also (California) also not registered as Democrat.
Another thought on the US election: the media build up seemed to try its damndest to inspire as much ill feeling and belligerent division as possible. And this might be the key to the whole thing. They can’t be sure who will get in but they can try their best to ensure that, no matter who it is, there will be vast reams of fury raked up over it.
I think that's the damn truth. Divide & conquer, rinse, repeat.
As a Scot myself, I'm perplexed as to what George offers to the conversation. I've watched AE since the start - drawn in by my admiration for Cory Morningstar. In other words, I'm not a troll!
I'm not sure what you mean. "As a Scot"? Am I not "Scottish" enough?
I simply offer views on what seems important to me. If you think what I'm saying is trivial or irrelevant then I'd be grateful if you could give me guidelines.
I acknowledge freely that the other speakers know far more about lots of topics I am ignorant of. What I comment on is tricks of propaganda and the entire transformation of the rhetorical landscape since covid.
I am also increasingly fascinated by the reactionary non-Marxist "critique" that is being offered up everywhere which I intend to expand on.
If you think I ought to be talking about something else then let me know.
If, on the other hand, you feel aversion to my physical appearance then I know your pain.
don't engage. It never ends well. See you tomorrow (maybe its a scots thing...who the fuck knows)-.
I had my suspicions. "I'm not a troll" is a giveaway.