Quote:
|
Originally Posted by gmku
Are there unpretentious intellectuals?
|
Pretentious suggests pretence. Most intellectuals are too earnest. I'm getting to really dislike for myself, and for all the intellectuals I know, the constant back-footing and defence we have to provide. Obnoxious, arrogant, obsequious, obstreperant, contrarian, infelicitous, introverted, pedantic, bathetic, pathetic, onanistic, puritanical [etc] - there are all valid insults for intellectuals. I don't know a single one who is genuinely pretentious - I know plenty of fake intellectuals though, and that's merely tragic. Pretentious suggests the contrivance of an actor, whom, one assumes, would always sublate the cogniscence of their contrivance.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rob Instigator
the cloistered attitudes that you expose are a result of the nature of our musical loves. I HATE top 40 music, I find it to be lowest common denominator music.
|
I'm not terribly fond of this sentiment. Ideally (and all musical arguments are essentially an exchange/ battle of idealisms) the musical dialogue would not be conflated with the economic dialogue. Not a possibility at present (or ever, so long as Capitalism reigns). I'm interested in an aesthetics which attempts (and necessarily fails) to trangress the economic [cf Adornian, Marxist, Hegelian] dialogue which serves merely to encourage the 'judge first lest ye' be judged last'. The top 40 is not
a priori a bad thing. Its manifestations, in terms of strict economics, are not immediately better or worse. I honestly believe the Carpenters to be a better band than most, if not all, indie bands of the last 40 years. I love Sonic Youth because they are pop, not because they are experimental (they're really not).
Endless over-sub-conflation of ridiculous dialogues - yes, I entirely agree with Trunky-wunky.