Sign in to follow this  
crazy jane

An Interesting Question

Recommended Posts

 

59 minutes ago, Violadamore said:

[Idly looks out the window, and watches a hawk nail a squirrel.] Sure.  Hence the phrase "dog eat dog". 

I guess I should have phrased it differently--"their own species," maybe. Cannibalism is pretty rare in most species (--behavior witnessed in some 1,500 species isn't much, considering that an estimated 8.3 million species currently exist). Less common among dogs than humans, I believe, and then only for survival.

Odd that we should malign dogs when describing human behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno.

I'm skeptical that the "young generation" lacks social niceties whereas the older generation doesn't.

I'm skeptical because that's been the line since human civilization began and I don't notice humanity getting worse and worse.  It seems about the same to me.

I meet awful older folks.  Awful folks my age, awful younger adults, and awful little kids.  Babies are mostly ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, crazy jane said:

 

I guess I should have phrased it differently--"their own species," maybe. Cannibalism is pretty rare in most species (behavior witnessed in some 1,500 species isn't much, considering an estimated that 8.3 millions species currently exist). Less common among dogs than humans, I believe, and then only for survival.

Odd that we should malign dogs when describing human behavior.

Personally, as I've mentioned in the past, I identify as a gender non specific Giraffe, so, your rules mean nothing to me :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stephen Fine said:

I dunno.

I'm skeptical that the "young generation" lacks social niceties whereas the older generation doesn't.

I'm skeptical because that's been the line since human civilization began and I don't notice humanity getting worse and worse.  It seems about the same to me.

I meet awful older folks.  Awful folks my age, awful younger adults, and awful little kids.  Babies are mostly ok.

It's not about nicety's , I would direct you to utube :lol:, to view the video of the SNLguy ranting at the audience, it was much more of a scolding, like scolding children who were 25, who didn't understand what they were doing was wrong or why.

Just like not really understanding "why" socialism/communism is wrong.

And to me it's about eb's and flows ,usually it bounces back and forth between long periods of peace, and then long periods of killing.

Of course the last 2000 years have been manipulated more than the previous, all based on the introduction of monetary systems and the ability to profit off of them based on misery and killing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Rue said:

Thought that was you...:angry:

Actually, I'm in the Deep South, but the comment you received could have come from anyone in any of our big cities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Stephen Fine said:

...I don't notice humanity getting worse and worse.  It seems about the same to me.

 

That's because you spend  much of your life in a bubble environment. Presumably you have an affinity for young people, since you chose to make your daily bread teaching them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who trusted God was love indeed
And love Creation's final law
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and claw
With ravine, shriek'd against his creed.

No coin without a "tails" side that's necessary for perspective. Here too.

If every squirrel lives & reproduces numerous times, 99 % of them end up starving to death when available food supply is outstripped by an order of magnitude. Or, weakened by starvation, succumbing in an epidemic. MUCH lousier ends than death by predator. Population control isn't built into prey animals (deer are another great example) the way it is into wolves. That's delegated to hawks, foxes &c.

This way the surplus doesn't go to waste.

It's a truly weird world when everything lives by eating everything else, granted. Mind bogglingly weird. But without the "tails" side contrast, how much would the flip side be appreciated ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, crazy jane said:

 

I guess I should have phrased it differently--"their own species," maybe. Cannibalism is pretty rare in most species................ Less common among dogs than humans, I believe, and then only for survival.

Odd that we should malign dogs when describing human behavior.

Strangely enough, true, BUT, they will savagely fight and kill each other over territory and pack identity.  I've seen it, had to break it up, bury the dead, and sew up the wounded too many times.  :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Stephen Fine said:

You didn't read the article in the Cincinnati Inquirer?  Or the update on Slipped Disc?

 

What actually happened is that the woman purchased a ticket that said NO RECORDING on it in a hall with posted signs that said NO RECORDING.  The soloist, ASM, noticed her RECORDING and shot her a look which she proceeded to ignore.  ASM then stopped playing which she proceeded to ignore.  ASM then shouted at her to stop recording which she proceeded to ignore.  She proceeded to TALK BACK to ASM.  The audience then booed which she proceeded to ignore.  She is STILL RECORDING at this point.

It took the President of the symphony to step in and escort the woman out and to ensure that she deleted the video.

 

Or, heck, if you want someone "closer to the situation" than the audience member in the Inquirer article or the orchestra member in the Slipped Disc update, there's always Anne-Sophie Mutter's opinion on the matter.

 

Now, tell me again who's spouting misinformation?

I went through your links, and there are 3 levels of information. The article from the Cinfinnati Inquirer has no information from anyone close enough to listen. The update on Slipped Disc has information from someone in the orchestra who also thought she was talking back, though said there was confusion over what was being said, as English was not her first language (or in other words, didn't quite understand what she was saying, and blamed it on her English, but thought she was arguing). Anne-Sophie Mutter did not say what the girl said, just that the recording went on for some time, and she felt violated.

Then you have the third level of information from an audience member close enough to hear what was said, who said that the girl stood up not to argue, but to apologize and bow repeatedly. Which will you believe? People who didn't hear what she said, or the person who did hear what she said? 

I understand that you read another point of view, which was that the audience/orchestra mostly thought she was arguing, and it takes some level of reading comprehension, and search for truth, to go beyond that, all the way to someone who heard the actual words being spoken, amidst the audience boos. I get it's hard, but I posted it once and you didn't read, and now I'm posting it again. I will temper my expectations, and expect more arguing though. It can be hard to read things that don't support your view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jezzupe said:

Basically you have young people who don't know how to behave and think that they are behaving fine.As soon as the scales tip, and those of older generations die off,and all that you have left are people who don't know how to behave, that is when you will know you have reached the end of the ride.

Absolutely hilarious take on things. Basically the ages old "kids these days" argument that the world will end when your particular generation dies off. Guess what, the generation before you said that about you too, and somehow life went on right? The ride you refer to?

Kids these days do have devices that do so many things, and they want to use that functionality. Technology, right??? Phew, what a world we live in. Life was simpler in the old days, before cell phones, right? Or was it before color telly and cable tv? Or was it before tv, and you only had the radio? Or was it before that pretentious Bell invented the telephone and people had to write letters? Or was it before the Postal Service, when you had to ride a horse to talk to someone face to face? Or was it before the wheel was invented, or.... Maybe it was simplest when we were apes, and only had to think about eating and mating. If only things could be that simple again...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Porteroso said:

Maybe it was simplest when we were apes, and only had to think about eating and mating. If only things could be that simple again...

Then be happy.  The way things are going, it will.  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Porteroso said:

Absolutely hilarious take on things. Basically the ages old "kids these days" argument that the world will end when your particular generation dies off. Guess what, the generation before you said that about you too, and somehow life went on right? The ride you refer to?

Kids these days do have devices that do so many things, and they want to use that functionality. Technology, right??? Phew, what a world we live in. Life was simpler in the old days, before cell phones, right? Or was it before color telly and cable tv? Or was it before tv, and you only had the radio? Or was it before that pretentious Bell invented the telephone and people had to write letters? Or was it before the Postal Service, when you had to ride a horse to talk to someone face to face? Or was it before the wheel was invented, or.... Maybe it was simplest when we were apes, and only had to think about eating and mating. If only things could be like that again...

I understand what you are saying and in an isolated nebulous involving the "statement" alone, you are correct and I would agree, however, this time it is different. The difference is that any time in the past when these things would be said, they would be said within the context of "americanism" , my statements are made implying that this 'those damn kids" thing is beyond a generational thing and is much more about THIS generation of young people being subjected to COMMUNIST SUBVERSION, so subversive that they do not even know it. 

in a nutshell, you are living a life, that life in this world could be likened to a video game, and in this game you are playing for points, those points, for most people , are MONEY. 

The problem in the world today is that most people do not understand how the points that we are playing for is what is causing "all of this" , they do not understand that "the money" not "money" is the problem.

And based on this fact, we have the global monetary systems that we do, PRIVATE ones.

Now in that context , we'll just skip "usury school" and assume that you have an understanding of the global usury scam that is being perpetrated against the global citizenry. We will assume you understand "money printed AS debt.

In that context, somewhere in the early 90's the "math" was done and the calculations figured and it was determined that the USA usury scam could be bilked out another 30 years or so before the math didn't add up anymore, where we are at right now.

And therefore it was pre-emptivley decided that America had been used up like a cheap whore and that it was time to shift the usury scam over to greener pastures, Chinese pastures. And so it was decided that the "farm" would slowly be shifted over to China where there were billions of new suckers waiting to be economically elevated.

Which of course leaves the banking cartel with the "how to get rid of the dead body that america will soon be" and that certainly within this slow death, it will be "pesky" and irksome.

I suppose we , the bankers could elevate China, and then they could use their new found glory and wealth to physically invade us, BUT WHY, when there is a much better way, you just tear america apart using ideological subversion .

And THAT is the big difference in the statement "those damn kids"....when older people said that in the past, they were older americans saying that about younger americans, now it's older people saying that about younger people who have been brainwashed by media and "education" 

And this is not just an american problem...this is globalism and nationalism, culture vs anti culture.

The bankers have used you to enrich those that would be your enemy, they are not invading you, they are buying up all your media and movie companies and inserting subversive propaganda, they are infiltrating higher education and turning it into "socialist school" , they are taking basic logic such as two different sexes and making it illogical to say such a thing, they are making terms "unlawful guy from another planet" illegal {free speech} and they are getting younger generations to think this is a great idea...just like , hey, it's a great idea to steal pre recorded football games, and who cares about boarders and if someone comes legally or not and on and on and on...the problem with many young people in this day and age is that they have been brainwashed and their thoughts are not even their own and they don't even know it.

We will soon be entering a period of "Normalization" which I can assure you is far from normal.

EDIT; which does not matter because we'll all be cooked to death by the sun in 12 years anyway, according to these same people, I mean it's right there in the university funded science report,see, say's so right there, right next to where it says eggs will kill you and coffee is bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Porteroso said:

I went through your links, and there are 3 levels of information. The article from the Cinfinnati Inquirer has no information from anyone close enough to listen. The update on Slipped Disc has information from someone in the orchestra who also thought she was talking back, though said there was confusion over what was being said, as English was not her first language (or in other words, didn't quite understand what she was saying, and blamed it on her English, but thought she was arguing). Anne-Sophie Mutter did not say what the girl said, just that the recording went on for some time, and she felt violated.

Then you have the third level of information from an audience member close enough to hear what was said, who said that the girl stood up not to argue, but to apologize and bow repeatedly. Which will you believe? People who didn't hear what she said, or the person who did hear what she said? 

I understand that you read another point of view, which was that the audience/orchestra mostly thought she was arguing, and it takes some level of reading comprehension, and search for truth, to go beyond that, all the way to someone who heard the actual words being spoken, amidst the audience boos. I get it's hard, but I posted it once and you didn't read, and now I'm posting it again. I will temper my expectations, and expect more arguing though. It can be hard to read things that don't support your view.

...

I read the Strad article.

 

The fact remains:

The ticket said no recording.  The hall had signs that said no recording.  The artist shot the woman an angry look and then asked her to stop recording...  the woman may or may not have "apologized and bowed".   It doesn't change the facts that she was recording and argued with the soloist.

I like that you view this as "three levels of information".  It's funny to me that, to you, only your article is the true one. They're just 3 slightly different versions of the same story.  Read all the sources and the picture becomes quite clear.  None of the sources conflict.  I absolutely believe that the woman tried to apologize at the end of it and loves ASM; sure, that makes sense to me.  But it's also clear to me that she tried to argue with the soloist about recording.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could that be clear to you? I am only being picky about my reading comprehension. There is a difference between parroting what everyone says she said, and hearing something for yourself. The only person who claimed to have heard what she said, contradicts everyone else who didn't hear what she said. There are 2 different versions of what happened once confronted. Either she stood up to argue and kept recording, or she stopped recording, apologized, and stood up to bow. 

You clearly did not read, which is why I'm glad I did not get my hopes up on that front. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

??

 

I absolutely did read.

The Strad says:

However, one eye-witness told The Strad: ‘I was in the front row with that girl, and I saw her stand, and I heard her apologize in broken English, bowing repeatedly and explaining that she had great admiration for the artist. The violinist responded quietly, “Then, I’m sorry. I’m sorry.”

--------

That source says nothing about whether or not she was or was not recording at this point in the altercation.  This source says nothing about when during the altercation this "bowing" and "admiration" took place, but it does mention that the "discussion reportedly lasted ‘several minutes’, the audience member, a young woman, apparently attempted to fend off the violinist’s complaint.."  

----------------

So... that's from your Strad article.  Did you read it?

If you read the stuff I posted, it fills in the gaps.  Unless you believe that my sources are inherently second rate because a member of the orchestra isn't as good/close as your anonymous audience member.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gaps? So in between the apologies she was arguing? Multiple personality disorder then... 

How honest of you to leave out this. 

Quote

But the rest of the audience (who couldn’t hear the soft voice of the girl) assumed she was talking back and gasped at her audacity in responding to the violinist; some even began to boo her. She left the auditorium with tears in her eyes.

 

The orchestra member admitted there was confusion over what was said. The person didn't really hear what was said. How is this hard to understand, don't make it about taking sides. It's just simple reality that only 1 source (of the ones in this thread) heard what was said. 

You are trying so hard to leave out what doesn't fit your narrative, to discredit the person near the scene as anonymous (isn't 'your' orchestra member also anonymous?) and to say they are my audience member. It makes it clear you can't be rational about this. Are you ASM's manager? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My source in the orchestra said ASM asked the person to stop recording, but the person continued. The request was repeated. This is *after* ASM had stopped playing. My source also told me there may have been a language comprehension problem on the part of the audience member. The whole thing went on for quite a while.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Porteroso said:

I understand that you read another point of view, which was that the audience/orchestra mostly thought she was arguing, and it takes some level of reading comprehension, and search for truth, to go beyond that, all the way to someone who heard the actual words being spoken, amidst the audience boos. I get it's hard, but I posted it once and you didn't read, and now I'm posting it again. I will temper my expectations, and expect more arguing though. It can be hard to read things that don't support your view.

I am sure that I have been guilty of this somewhere down the line, on many occasions, but calling out another person's reading comprehension or any other character-type attack is probably a bad idea during a robust and healthy debate unless the debate is actually about that person whom you are debating.  

Whether the young woman in question, or anyone else for that matter in a similar context, argued or not, the fact is that this discussion is about the impropriety of personally recording, or even on a more general level, distracting an artist.  Put this into an everyday context....some people seek attention, and on that note want as many people to be watching them as possible when doing something.  Then there are others who don't complain when their boss, mom, dad, or anyone else hover over them and watch them do something.  Then you take it on another level and add difficulty and concentration levels to the task that you are performing.  Ask yourself, do you really want someone distracting you while you are performing such a difficult task?  One day, social media and all of this tech and changing social norms will catch up to us and this will be a moot debate (maybe).  But ASM is from a generation where this sort of thing was just not considered appropriate.  So much so that the venue in question apparently had a no recording policy.  The young woman violated that policy.  Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, violinnewb said:

I am sure that I have been guilty of this somewhere down the line, on many occasions, but calling out another person's reading comprehension or any other character-type attack is probably a bad idea during a robust and healthy debate unless the debate is actually about that person whom you are debating.  

Whether the young woman in question, or anyone else for that matter in a similar context, argued or not, the fact is that this discussion is about the impropriety of personally recording, or even on a more general level, distracting an artist.  Put this into an everyday context....some people seek attention, and on that note want as many people to be watching them as possible when doing something.  Then there are others who don't complain when their boss, mom, dad, or anyone else hover over them and watch them do something.  Then you take it on another level and add difficulty and concentration levels to the task that you are performing.  Ask yourself, do you really want someone distracting you while you are performing such a difficult task?  One day, social media and all of this tech and changing social norms will catch up to us and this will be a moot debate (maybe).  But ASM is from a generation where this sort of thing was just not considered appropriate.  So much so that the venue in question apparently had a no recording policy.  The young woman violated that policy.  Period.

Right, this really isn't about the minutia of the incident as much as it is about the internal psychology of someone who thinks it's ok to do that, and again I think we could directly link this individuals actions and or behavior to societal "changes" .

After pondering this some, I do feel I need to correct my position or clarify.

Even though this can certainly appear to be a "generational thing" and it mostly is, what it really is , is a ; "I am one to embrace Iphone/smartphone technology." "I am part of the "selfie people" "I embrace these devices that allow me to invade privacy as well as embrace having my privacy invaded in exchange for "gadgetry" 

And so for the most part, statistically, based on ownership, usage, peer social structures and other factors we have the youth as being the ones who primarily embrace this as well as that demographic being the target of those that created these devices....yet, in the same breath I would say there are many "middle aged" and "older" people who embrace this "tech" as well. So perhaps it is that it appears to be generational, but is more about ones acceptance of "stupid phone" life.

At that point it may be then more about what time frame you grew up in, but perhaps more ones frame of mind.

The transhumanist agenda will move forward, the technocrats will create the devices that the tyrants will use to take you down,and yes it all starts with some young girl not having the social "whatever" to know to not film, to be be so, well everyone films with their camera,for it to be so "kneejerk" 

soon enough she will have a direct link in her mind to the phones software, that will gently remind her internally to not misbehave in social settings, elsewise her social credit score will suffer, and if she persists,corrections may need to be intensified. 

time to put the silicon obsession down.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jezzupe said:

Even though this can certainly appear to be a "generational thing" and it mostly is, what it really is , is a ; "I am one to embrace Iphone/smartphone technology." "I am part of the "selfie people" "I embrace these devices that allow me to invade privacy as well as embrace having my privacy invaded in exchange for "gadgetry" 

A point I've been reminding myself of:

In this new age, when a product is "free", YOU are the product. Google, Facebook, Baidu... they are collecting, analyzing, packaging, and selling our data.  People imagine that since it's "just metadata", it's harmless.  This betrays a serious lack of imagination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jezzupe said:

Even though this can certainly appear to be a "generational thing" and it mostly is, what it really is , is a ; "I am one to embrace Iphone/smartphone technology." "I am part of the "selfie people" "I embrace these devices that allow me to invade privacy as well as embrace having my privacy invaded in exchange for "gadgetry" 

Same.  The problem is that the resulting differences amongst the generations is that people who grew up only knowing the last two decades or so don't understand that a person like ASM, who did not grow up with social media, smart phones, etc, does not wish to be recorded without her knowledge and permission: whereas, Justin Bieber would likely love you to record and post about him.

So yes, the younger generation does not have full empathy about these kinds of issues, through no fault of their own, and we need to have discussions like this one in order to educate and enlighten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Stephen Fine said:

In this new age, when a product is "free", YOU are the product. Google, Facebook, Baidu... they are collecting, analyzing, packaging, and selling our data.  People imagine that since it's "just metadata", it's harmless.  This betrays a serious lack of imagination.

Agreed!  This carefree attitude about making my personal and unique experiences and treating such as "data" for free dissemination is disconcerting.  I remember a time (and I am not that old) where CD's were new.  Before then, I resorted to a few live performances a year, LPs and cassettes,  for me to hear pieces and study them.  My own interpretations of some violin pieces are (In my non-humble opinion :D) are better than some I have heard on youtube because of the fact that I couldn't just watch, listen and copy others as easily as people can these days.  When someone says "_________ is a lost art,"  this statement is truer now more than ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, violinnewb said:

So yes, the younger generation does not have full empathy about these kinds of issues, through no fault of their own, and we need to have discussions like this one in order to educate and enlighten.

 

I've had people of all ages pull out cameras at my concerts.

 

What I have seen only rarely in my life is a photographer pulling out a camera at an event that doesn't allow photography.  Sure, I see it sometimes, usually pushy people who seem to think the rules don't apply to them or that the rules are stupid.

Mostly though, what I have seen are people making an effort to follow the traditions of concert etiquette.  Part of the mission of the chamber music festival I play with is presenting free concerts to communities with limited access to Classical Music.  We've shown up at tiny village community centers and churches and theaters and houses where it is sometimes an adult person's first time hearing live Classical Music.  The audiences who live hours from anywhere are usually the most appreciative and polite.

In the small cities, it's interesting how some of them have strong and knowledgable appreciation of music and some of them don't.  It's annoyingly unpredictable when you're planning a concert tour.

One of the things we do in all of my chamber music concerts is describe to the audience some of what is about to happen, to lay down some expectations of how it will unfold...  usually there's some talk about the story of the repertoire, how the music is constructed, about how long it is.  Everyone, even experienced Classical concert attendees approach us afterwards to tell us how much they love the "talking at the beginning."

(Many places put the notes in the program instead of communicating them verbally.  I love to read good program notes, don't get me wrong, but as a performer, I'd rather the audience have the information they need to relate to the music before it starts and not have them distracted by reading while I'm playing.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Stephen Fine said:

 

Mostly though, what I have seen are people making an effort to follow the traditions of concert etiquette.  

One of the things we do in all of my chamber music concerts is describe to the audience some of what is about to happen, to lay down some expectations of how it will unfold...  usually there's some talk about the story of the repertoire, how the music is constructed, about how long it is.  Everyone, even experienced Classical concert attendees approach us afterwards to tell us how much they love the "talking at the beginning."

 

My Orchestra started doing this and after the conductor gives his spiel, there is far less smart phone usage, clapping between movements, etc.  There is nothing wrong with enlightening the next generation and/or past generational groups who are new to classical music.  I love it Stephen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.