Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - fractal

[1] 2
Interzone / Re: Birds influencing music
« on: March 16, 2010, 07:52:31 AM »
Yes, as well as realistic painting of a landscape can in no way influence our feelings like the real one does. You just know that the painter tried to imitate it. So the birdsong should be just an inspiration in order to not sound "fake"

Interzone / Re: Birds influencing music
« on: March 13, 2010, 04:08:50 AM »
Yes, as i read my post again i see it sounds like i'm talking just about "using" birds as sounds in music. But what i meant and failed to pass across is that the structure of their melodies is unexploited and unexplored by men. How birds sing is so pleasing to the ear, yet so different from any composed music. Or does someone know of any music that resembles or reflects the methods of intuitive bird singing?

Maybe René Lussier made a tiny step towards this with his Le tresor de la langue, where he records French people speaking and follows the melodic lines of their speech with a nylon guitar and contrabass i think (adding other instruments at times). Quite musical, actually, but most of time it is about the technique.

Interzone / Re: Birds influencing music
« on: March 12, 2010, 06:02:38 PM »
I don't know about birds influencing the history of music....yet i think I've heard about Mussorgskij been influenced by their singing, Cage having them sing right on stage....but what i wanted to say - birds aren't exploited yet. There's much inspiration that can emerge out of their melodies. It is a strange approach to "music" as intuitive that the mankind, according to myself, didn't make use of it. But it's just another force of nature. Using bird sounds as a sketch to one's own music would be as valid and of the same quality as using any other source. Maybe even worse, because the art (maybe sorry for introducing my own point of view, i still think of this forum as a free forum for possibly clear debate) should be a revealing of one's own vocabulary using techniques learnt and experiences modulating those learnings. And that should create uniqueness.

Interzone / Re: Question about understanding music
« on: March 12, 2010, 05:53:14 PM »
For what i've heard, there are 2 ways to enjoy the music. The first, simply enjoy the flow as just a receiver - which is not bad or anything, i don't think that in music such categories can ever be even proposed to exist (or that something in music exists..heh) or, as a second level, the listener is also a creator, improvisational player whose unconscious goal is to exert those pesky neurons of himself in ways of academically enjoying the music (either in self-confirmartory way or re-creationary one - which doesn't really have to be so academic, one can say just sensitive - but those terms are so judging, i don't like this). I also propose  that not one of those two ways is superior to the other, for to enjoy the music as it is, one has to experience every possible experience that ought to emerge from that certain piece of paper....i wonder, maybe i don't fit in the "anus crew"? Or do i?

Interzone / Re: Smoking pot makes you depressed for life
« on: December 23, 2009, 02:17:28 AM »
Someone said earlier that there's no evidence that marijuana kills brain cells - actually there is evidence that endocannabinoids stimulate PROLIFERATION of brain cells. Tested on rats, of course. I read it in some Nature, a month ago i guess. Later i'll cite it here. (no time)

Interzone / Re: Failings of science
« on: September 30, 2009, 02:02:30 PM »
No wonder "science" is so bad -- it's done backward. Instead of seeking truth by experimenting, we seek a popular answer and then make narrow cherrypicked-factor studies to justify it.

First of all, I wouldn´t make such statement based on a general newspaper article...

These are basic scientific errors and to overcome them is the first thing young scientists are being taught - or as far as my experience goes. But sometimes the problem is somewhere else - sometimes the grant system is set so badly that you have to do and publish nonsense and embrace the popular rhetoric to get money for more important research or "publicity points" which are needed if you want the results of your work to be seen in the academic field.

What You seem to be pointing to is the level of understanding of the scientific method by scientists. I can't talk about America, but i think that more and more people are getting into the scientific sphere and the filter which truly separarated the able and unable begins to tear from within - the reasons are economic.
So it seems just "natural" that scientist are producing their own kind of spam. I don't think it's so much an issue - as long as we strive to have better and better teachers. That's the goal of, I dare say, all of the universities of the world.

Or did I miss Your point?

Interzone / Re: Atheism
« on: December 28, 2008, 01:01:41 PM »
And we return once again to the problem of education, will to be educated and that the uneducated fools are being heard more and more. To come to a conclusion in such argument as is the question of god, one must have great portion of knowledge and dedication. There are many approaches and in each of them the terms are defined quite clearly, but when someone comes to the problem as a whole and does not see the little nuances changing the meaning, confusion will occur.

and on a personal note: Sorry if i am a bit inarticulate here, it is late here and my eyes begin to close. I don't often engage in debates, but hey, thanks for this one, it's great and to the point!

Interzone / Re: Atheism
« on: December 28, 2008, 12:11:39 PM »
But particularly there is a point to atheism in being the systematic way of denying the myth about God, since the genealogy of ideas has brought us to the point where this idea is dead.
Thanks for pointing this out, i said earlier that atheism doesn't have historical context and i was apparently wrong. But, isn't this the historical approach only? Because "God is dead" effectively destroys some values, but doesn't replace them by anything one could live by. I think that the personal atheism has to be something more then just negation. But then again, i might be wrong because many people adopt "God is dead" and subscribe to material values. And i don't want to confuse atheism and idolatry.

Interzone / Re: Atheism
« on: December 28, 2008, 09:17:13 AM »
Really?  Not believing in fairy tales is just as irrational as believing in them?  I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with you there.
Perhaps you misunderstand religion as a whole? There is no importance in that the god actually exists, but in the faith and the religious feeling that connects one to the world and the other world. As said earlier, there is also the social aspect, binding people together. That's why many religions have/try to have impact on family life (marrying in churches speaks for all). Come on, it's a cliché, but people truly don't believe in fairy tales in terms of senile daddy smiling on them from the cloudy cloud and speaking about heaven. (ok, some do)

Lastly, I hate people who try to turn atheism into a religion.  This is mainly done by Secular Humanists and I assume everyone already knows why this is a failure of an ideology.
That's because its function is partly the same as of religion. As said above.

One last thing.  What exactly is a "well-devoted atheist?"  Atheism isn't an ideology or belief system.  Using religious language to describe your atheism is very telling.
What does it matter if some of us are atheists and some not? We're here to discuss things abstract from individual struggle, not to blab about someone's tastes in pink socks.

Interzone / Re: Atheism
« on: December 28, 2008, 07:13:34 AM »
In my short life, I've seen many Christians (of all people) who were much more capable and level-headed human beings than atheists. Perhaps being a well-minded person and being religious are not mutually exclusive, but it does take a certain mind to transcend religious symbolism and to grasp what is meant by religions and their accompanying morals and virtues.

It seems to me (here in Czech Republic) that the "default setting" that people are born into is driven by atheism. As everyone in middle ages who didn't think of this was by default a christian, now he would be an atheist. That's partly because of seeming overflowing of the "religion market" and partly because of crowdist fear of looking different. The religious person then would be one thinking about such topic so much that he comes out with it. There are many aspects to be considered in reaching out to grasp the attention of god in yourself that i would not only say that "being a well minded person and being religious are not mutually exclusive", but in a sincere person, it has to come hand in hand. Of course (or at least i think it might be like this), religions are built as simple pieces of wisdom that speak to even the dumbest mind. But this is true only when there's one religion present. The religions that deal with the true, abstract, moral god (as one's will and self-control) must be first recognised and learnt - that's the point where the well-mindedness comes in handy. You know, it seems to me that many, if not all, religions offer the same goal and the same path to it, but when an inexperienced person is exposed to the seeming variety of them, he becomes confused and tries to run away to denial - and that's atheism.

Atheism is just a half religion, because it offers only the point of evidence, of being bound to the world somehow. Religions also have a historical context (that is something atheism cannot ever have by definiton) and a social one (that is something atheism denies). The only people able to go on without any belief (atheism or theism) are the Strangers of Albert Camus. But for them not to be random marionettes of butterfly effects from over the universe, some solid point of security (perhaps fantastic) is also needed. Sad old news is that today's society offers it in the form of money and all those matters.

Interzone / Re: Poor poetry in metal
« on: December 28, 2008, 06:06:54 AM »
I think the meaning (at least if understood) is much more important than the, "technique" shall we say, that was used. It's the same type of argument as one would have if one person places the technical and structural aspects of music above the, "emotive" and "artistic" side of music.

Sure, you can't place it "above", that would result in how-to-make-a-song-in-6-easy-steps-like things, copying the textbook, not creating anything. But to be specific here, the technical/conscious approach to writing lyrics makes one able to enhance the mood of a piece - for example you can have lyrics with a pacing rhythm, rhythm that can perhaps support the other instrument or be a complementary part to them, as drums can be.

When writing vocal part, one must keep in mind that it's actually two parts that have to cooperate - first there's the melody and rhythm of the singer, independent from words. On the other side are the words, their phrasing that should (or does not have to - depending on the artist's plan) feel natural to the language (that's why it's better to write in your native language. If you aren't on the level that you could undergo at least a high school completely in the chosen language, it's certainly not a good idea to try to write poetry in it). The words in sentences have rhythm by themselves, and the goal should be not to violate this natural rhythm by rhythm of other instruments, including the voice.

Interzone / Re: Poor poetry in metal
« on: December 27, 2008, 12:41:52 PM »
But to actually write poetry like that would require extended study/practice which would go beyond the attention span of most people.

Well that's the point. Classical music is actually being taught in universities and all that. Why pop sucks (and surely not all pop sucks) is that the musicians take it's form for so easy and liberate that they do not need to know the theory behind the music they make. Metal is all the same in that the musicians aren't educated in music - the theme work, the forms/structure etc - because it would need serious research and one would have to give it all his attention. People study to be a composer, they study to be a conductor, an instrumentalist - each and every of these positions requires many years to master. And in the band, you have to be a pro in many of those fields to succeed. There's the composing, there's playing and also the lyrical poetry - until you did not undergo some university degree (sounds silly that way - well we can say until the wisdom of the specific field of art hasn't been transferred to you from a master), there's very high chance that you cannot even imagine the possibillities of art - or you could perhaps end up inventing something already invented. Music needs fanatics like Vangelis, because it should be a way of living, so high value that one should die for it (born in 20th century, i am not really sure about this..but then i remember Balzac dying for his invented world of fictional Paris) - every field of human doing needs people that are curious and hungry for knowledge in terms of knowing history and opening new possibillities. But one man can't do everything.

I happen to know some people studying classical music and am beginning to study it myself and many of them - at least the more open-minded (it seems to me that this term is somewhat pejorative here - i do not use it as described here (http://www.anus.com/metal/hall/index.php/topic,4921.0.html), rather for people that do not hide behind some rigid mask, preventing them from growth in ways they do not concentrate on - most people are open in the fields on which they are focusing) show very friendly attitude towards metal AND folklore. Of course, even from those elites, there will be a lot of garbage, but hey, what does it matter.

What i wanted to say is that metal is starting to be recognized on this level - and should be kept there for good by people that give their lives to it.

Metal / Re: Death Metal and Black Metal Wiki
« on: December 31, 2007, 02:19:35 PM »
I'd like to encourage you all to contribute to the Hessian wiki, for now it is quite stagnating, lacking writers.

Interzone / Re: Is democracy really the problem?
« on: December 31, 2007, 01:58:22 PM »
Is democracy really the current primary cause of degeneracy in the U.S.? If not, then was it at any point the initiating cause of degeneracy in the U.S.?

Not neccessarily, but gives the degenerate a big chance to make a degenerate impact on reality.

Metal / Re: Wolfquest: for video game junkies
« on: December 31, 2007, 11:12:02 AM »
Older than you think. This concept is from the beginning of the 90's - the game was called Wilderness or Survival, I cannot remember now. It's all the same - you're a wolf, trying to survive in some park or something, forest maybe, hunting and mating female wolves.

[1] 2