Is opera a kind of literature?

I am disapointed with the forum, and with my self cause I've been polemic for making people think about their own conceptions, thinkings, values, etc.

It has not worked. The more I've tried to make people think in another point of view, more people have caught on to their own values, being categorical.

You are disappointed... why? Because you have not been successful at converting others over to your point of view? You suggest you just offer another point of view, but perhaps some of us have been exposed to that point of view more times than you can imagine. I must say that from my experiences with JBI here I would never underestimate what he/she? has or has not read. My own reading experience is not so limited itself, and to this I add an experience with art, art criticism, and art theory... a great deal of which has centered on your expressed notions that all is relative/subjective. The argument is quite old... and tired by now... and in the visual arts it probably pre-dates Duchamp who at least threw it out there with a sense of humor and irony.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brasil

Some survive (Dante, Shakespeare, Beethoven, Leonardo) and they were great (still are) but that does not mean Beethoven is a influence to hip hop "musicians"

---

Ha! Shows what you know. Time for a little history lesson. As you can see in this rare archival Disney footage, Beethoven was sporting a funky beat as early as the 1930's:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8XnO...eature=related

As everyone knows, this soundtrack gained wild popularity in the '70's when it was showcased in Saturday Night Fever, and it couldn't be long until we started getting a little hip hop mixed in to this euphonious blend of classical disco:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fM8l...eature=related

And of course Kanye's gotta get a piece of that in a video decidedly less kid friendly than the first:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jumo...eature=related

So you see how wrong you are to exclude a consideration of Beethoven from the history of hip hop? :D

Quote:

---

Maybe, there are people here that think hip hop is a poor art. But not for the ghetto people. For them, hip hop is most important than Mozart. Who am I (and who are you) to say the opposite?

---

OK, now I'm going to be a little more serious. As St. Luke's and other regulars know, I agree with the pith of his opinion that all art is not equal and that some is better than others. The problem I sometimes have with these "elitism" vs. "relativism" discussions is that taking the elitist side can be so quickly misinterpreted as a closed minded socially elitist stance that wants to make everyone listen to nothing but Bach. I think there has to be a more nuanced series of questions rather than simply the one question people tend to focus on in such discussions: "is it art?" When people ask if something is art, they're really asking a whole load of different questions: What kind of art is it? What level of art is it? How seriously should it be taken? Is it worth listening to/reading/viewing at all? What kind of use does it have? What kind of value does it have? What kind of experiences does it offer?

I completely understand the social value of the relativist idea that any creative output can be considered a kind of art, because it prevents art from becoming an exclusionary and stagnant monolith of canonical works. I agree with you that both Hip Hop artists and Beethoven should be considered art. This does not, however mean that they are the same kind of art or have the same value, or rather the same kind of value. There are many different kinds of value. There's the value of entertainment in the moment, nostalgic value, historical value, the value of representing a certain culture, transcendental value etc. There are also different uses for art. Music, for example can be used for (among many other things): dancing, religious meditation, other kinds of spiritual expression, goofing off with friends at a party, comfort in times of sorrow, karaoke, opening communication with those different from ourselves, something to fill in the space while you put someone on hold and (to get back to the subject of this thread) as a piece of other art forms such as film or opera. If you're judging the value of a piece of musical art by its use for a dance mix at a party, I'll readily concede that hip hop is better hands down than Beethoven in that context. If you're judging it by your own nostalgic personal associations, the most valuable song is going to be different for everyone, since the guy who danced with his wife for the first time to Vanilla Ice may find that the most nostalgically valuable piece he can think of, while someone else may have fallen in love at a concert of Gregorian chant. If you're looking for something that represents modern urban street life, Beethoven again loses out. If you're judging the value of a piece of art in terms of its ability to transcend time and culture and to offer something that will still be unique and satisfying on the thousandth time you experience it (part of what St. Luke's and others mean when they talk about "great art"), I think Beethoven's got it over most hip hop artists I've heard (though I'm no expert in the genre and may well have missed something mind blowing).

A final point: one problem, of course, with the above comparison is that Beethoven is one artist, whereas "hip hop" is an entire genre of music. While, as I said above, I haven't yet run across a hip hop artist who I think has the lasting quality that Beethoven has, I wouldn't for a minute say that it is impossible that something as good as Beethoven could emerge in some way from the hip hop genre. I posted the youtube clips above in a spirit of levity, but they also are a good representation of something I think is wonderful and exciting about youtube, which is the way it functions as a leveling place where all art is equal. The openness of a forum that allows people to play around with combining things as different as Mickey Mouse, Beethoven, Kanye West etc. is an active demonstration of the sort of open minded experimentation that has always been the basis for the production of great art. So, while I wouldn't agree with the claim that any of the clips I posted above has any lasting value as transcendent works of art, I would still say that they are invaluable in terms of their use as the type of artistic experimentation that the production of such art is based on (and invaluable as well, of course, as humorous entertainment for bored lit net browsers ;))

Petrarch... you are surely wasting your time with this Literature thing. You should be surely applying your skills as a diplomat somewhere... perhaps the Middle east?:nod:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brasil

"Eastern Philosophy: Hindus didn't the same as the Arabians. "
I agree.
But my point was about chinese ancient philosophy, and a little of Hindu.

---

Even chinese philosophy is rooted in different views, but that is the point of using specific words - You are communicating with others, if you do not specify and put all in a bag, stuff completely different, what you are saying will always sound strange to those who are well informed about the subject.

Quote:

---

"Memory itself is selective."
I totally agree!

That's just one point that makes our conscience subjective. Even philosophy and science can be subjective (I am not being contradictory, the context here is different).

So, at the end, all resume to dogma and prejudice.

---

In the end it is all quite simple, we may have philosophical systems or products that represent the subjective side, and one for objective, but entire universes like Philosophy or Art, they are always both. It depends the aspect you are analysing.

Quote:

---

The best philosopher for me is the greek Socrates: "The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing".

I am not tell that for you, but for all (includin myself).

---

I may be mistaken, but Socrates system is a bit more complex and that was just a part of it, the instigation for futher investigation, the non-acceptance of "truths", specially those accepted already as real without proper verification or capacity to be explained. The context of Socrates is more important that his quote.

Quote:

---

Socratesybe, had a contact with the eastern philosophies. It is possible? I don't know, just maybe, but the fact is: it seems.

---

I do not think there is much doubt, considering Socrates is pretty much what Plato saw of him and Plato had pitagorean influence and Pitagoras seems to have oriental influence...

Quote:

---

Returning to the point: at the end, all resume to dogma and prejudice.
I will respect and consider everybody's oppinion but not necessary agree with all, because of one main point: everybody' view (oppinion) here is very categorical.

---

I think, was it was pointed, your judgment of other's vallues and experience are out of place. Some of us maybe categorical because it is a style of discuss, but some just because they have a vast experience in those fields and you sometimes seems to lack it, but already conclusions that you wish to be accepted. Also, you seem to think that certain about something is a negative thing, this roots you relativism and in the end relativism is dangerous because it only grows strength if you accept all can be equally false. As a admirer of Plato, you should consider how relativism is a danger and there is possibility to be "sure" about something.

Quote:

---

Being categorical is the same of prejudice (in this case). Everybody try to make his own point of view the only truth, considering that as if knowing something.

---

See, that is not true.Being categorical is nothing but assuming a discuss of authority and some people are authorities. They have studied for years, they have mistakes but much of what they produced is accepted or tested for years, with a big experience behind it. Not everyone have the same amount of knowledge and I think you said you are a teacher, a Teacher must be categorical to teach.

Quote:

---

I am disapointed with the forum, and with my self cause I've been polemic for making people think about their own conceptions, thinkings, values, etc.

It has not worked. The more I've tried to make people think in another point of view, more people have caught on to their own values, being categorical.

---

That have been asnwered because you overvallue yourself a lot here. We all here have experiences and knowledge to be respected.
I think you have good intentions, but must be more careful of how you use your words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stlukesguild

Petrarch... you are surely wasting your time with this Literature thing. You should be surely applying your skills as a diplomat somewhere... perhaps the Middle east?:nod:

---

:lol: Surely great progress could be made if we just got Olmert and Abbas to loosen up and boogie down to "A Fifth of Beethoven." :nod:

Surely great progress could be made if we just got Olmert and Abbas to loosen up and boogie down to "."

I don't know... I mean I actually like what the Jacques Loussier Trio does with Bach and Vivaldi, but A Fifth of Beethoven just makes me want to hurt somebody.:crash: :smash: :sick: :brow:

Quote:

---

I don't know... I mean I actually like what the Jacques Loussier Trio does with Bach and Vivaldi, but A Fifth of Beethoven just makes me want to hurt somebody.

---

Even when Mickey Mouse is dancing to it? :lol:(See my first link in original post above if you haven't already.) See, this is a practical case in point as to why we need to carefully define what music has universal and transcendent qualities to put to use in peacemaking. Wanting to hurt somebody not being the goal of diplomacy, I'll have to stick with nothing but Mozart when I'm appointed Middle East ambassador. :D

For anyone
I respect all point of view here, but I do not agree with everyone.
It is important each one have your own point of view. It shows how relative is the human being.

I've learned a lot with all of you and I hope my posts arouse the interest about other cultures (specially Brazilian, cause it is still unknown)

I will not have the time to reply here every post. I will leave the forum for a while and maybe, when I get the time, I come back. I must reduce my participation for keep myself studing and working.
Perhaps once in a week I can participate.


For JCamilo
Some values like "human's life value" or "the mutual respect" or "love your neighbor as you love yourself"... etc.... are not relative. Those kind of values are perfect, they must remain for ever.

But the values about art, about styles, about what is good literature, which writer is best... are abstract and relative values. Thouse kind of values can be studied, but it is impossible to separate the person who study and the object of study. It is the consciousness that tends to give meaning.
Even in science and more on art.
That is what Phenomenology says.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brasil

For anyone

For JCamilo
Some values like "human's life value" or "the mutual respect" or "love your neighbor as you love yourself"... etc.... are not relative. Those kind of values are perfect, they must remain for ever.

---

This short of ethics, are ethics. So what

Quote:

---

But the values about art, about styles, about what is good literature, which writer is best...

---

No sense. If you ask an artists that is trying to draw a human with realistic approch and for no perspective reason his human figure looks like Frida's portraits, you know about someone who does not domain the technique he proposed to use - Techniques analyse are not subjective. And that would made his work a bad work.
Aesthetical vallues may change with societies, but it is not about comparing which one is better (this would be "my son is prettier than others") but which one had domain over it or not.
For those reason, One can safelly say that Dante is much better than Dan Brown, and no group or 558 fans of Dan Brown will be able to change a notion, a status, a influece build in 600 years and that one critic like Umberto Eco, can show you the reasons of why.

Quote:

---

are abstract and relative values. Thouse kind of values can be studied, but it is impossible to separate the person who study and the object of study. It is the consciousness that tends to give meaning.

---

Even in science and more on art.
That is what Phenomenology says.[/QUOTE]

And still I want to see you coming to Biologist and use "It is all relative, that dude thinks never happened evolution. Since *insert here your list of reasons about relativism*, he may be write. It is impossible to tell. Good luck on that.

O Guarani (Overture):
http://youtube.com/watch?v=UMkLchCMN...eature=related



For anyone in this forum
I have posted in this very forum some images about Brazilian art:

http://www.online-literature.com/for...559#post583559

There are paintings (from Brazilian Romanticism, Modernism and other styles), examples of Baroque sculpture and futuristic architecture.