Letters to the Editor
-
Not an American disease.
I'm English, have lived in the Netherlands and am now living and working in North Carolina. To be honest, I don't see much of a difference between Americans and Europeans in anti-intellectualism. That's unfortunately not much of an endorsement of American education, but I would like to point out that this American self-flagellation sometimes seems to be taken as an embarrassed apology by snotty Europeans... and it makes me want to puke. Sure, Americans are often quite ignorant of European geography. But normally when I turn the tables on said snotty European friends, they are almost equally ignorant of North American geography. Furthermore, as an evolutionary biologist, I would like to point out that creationist is flourishing in most parts of the world. In fact, my gut feeling is that Americans seem to be a bit better educated about science than Europeans.
My point is, I suppose, that while the emphasis of this article was "American" anti-intellectualism, I think it is a more widespread phenomenon than just that.
-
Vidiots?
Is Salon perhaps contributing to the "idiocracy" trend with the whole "Talking Heads" insertions that keep turning up in various Salon subsections? I like some Salonistas' writing, but what I'm most interested in is their words, rather than watching/hearing them talk to me. Why is this happening? The video clips can't possibly save bandwidth, compared to a text-only piece, can they??
-
Thank you
That was a great article, and I will most likely be picking her book up in the near future. However, Miller articulates many points I feel strongly about when we discuss the "intellectual pursuits" as opposed to the "fluff media" that bombards us daily.
I'm a self-professed book snob, always have been, always will be. A few years ago I fretted endlessly about how television and the internet were ruining print media, that no one would be reading books at all in just a few short years. And yet, the book industry has been riding a very steady, expansive growth over that same time. All my friends and I consume books like addicts (and we're the generation supposed to be most effected by the internet, the most turned off to books, with attention spans of a millisecond). Powell's, that bookstore of bookstores, is still a zoo every weekend with twenty minute lines and solipsistic crowds searching for their books. Another aspect I've recently noticed is book lengths are not getting shorter - they are, in fact getting longer and longer. What started last century with "Ulysses" and "Finnegan's Wake" has spawned authors like Pynchon, William T. Vollmann, David Foster Wallace, and John Barth. Denis Johnson and Roberto Bolano's newest are pretty hefty reads as well. And they're popular! And let's not forget the increasing lengths of the Harry Potter series, turning kids on to reading.
Frankly, reading can't be replaced by the internet. Computer screens strain the eyes too much for continued exposure (not that I'm unaware that many are pushing their visual capacity to the brink). Another thing is - this is the so called "information age". This is a generation who devour Wikipedia, learning as much about any esoteric information they can get their fingers on. It's a wonderful development that helps level the playing field for the majors and the minors in the media. Don't forget the majority of books out there are the grocery-store paperbacks that offer little but televisionistic escapism. Now, with the internet, we have ways of connecting various authors, artists, musicians we would never in the first place have heard of.
So, while I think Jacoby will make some interesting and necessary points about anti-intellectualism, I see that there's an awareness of such ideologies that nourishes a change in attitudes. The information age is revolutionary - and with all revolutions some will miss the point, some will only understand it partially, and the rest of us can feel the endorphin rush of newness. Thanks.
-
puccini and pop fluff
You might want to re-consider your characterization of Puccini as "pop fluff." It never was, and it certainly isn't now. Puccini's operas were great art from the start and they've only become greater with the passing of time, no different from a beethoven symphony in that regard.
You want the equivalent of pop fluff in Puccini's time? Try someone like Friedrich von Flotow's operas. Or Franz von Suppe's operas. Both were excellent craftsmen who wrote flawless pop fluff..but none of it will ever be great art. Good art. Serviceable. Not great.
So, it probably isn't accurate to compare puccini to today's pop music. As with any popular entertainment, some of it will last, most of it won't.
Telemann's Tafelmusik was the ultimate in popular entertainment in its time, still derided by some, it's made its way into the category of great art. Much else from that time, equally popular, is totally forgotten now, and usually with good reason. It didn't have that *thang* it needed to last. However you define that thang, it exists, and makes the difference between art that lasts, and art that doesn't.
Puccini had it. Probably a lot of current popular music doesn't. But there's no sin in that. Such music isn't meant to last. It's meant to be consumed...and to make way for the Next Thing.
-
@ moira kelly
No, I didn't misunderstand you; I was not directing the ire in my last post at you. I am sorry you got that impression. I actually thought that we had some thoughts in common when I read the post of yours I responded to. I just went off on money and mother seller outers because those things get to me.
Again, sorry if I came off wrong.
-
Thanks anon
Thanks anon, whoever you are.
-
mdaf28
Good night, Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are
-
@taliesen
Prolly this will get lost in this terribly long list of letters. I just wanted to say I wasn't saying that either of the flame warrior references I posted pertained to *you*. I just though you would find the flame warrior list funny, and those two in particular seemed to reflect personalities you referred to in your earlier post - which I liked.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.