bye bye, Nimrud, bye bye

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • jean
    Late member
    • Nov 2010
    • 7100

    #61
    Originally posted by mercia View Post
    I may have missed the point - has Nimrud been destroyed in order to stimulate creativity or make way for social housing ?

    Comment

    • Pabmusic
      Full Member
      • May 2011
      • 5537

      #62
      Originally posted by jean View Post
      The iconoclasm of ISIS follows precisely that of our own dear Puritans, doesn't it?
      Well, at 400 years' remove. There seems to be an implication here of "who are we to criticise?". If that's so, then it's very muddled thinking indeed.

      Comment

      • Flosshilde
        Full Member
        • Nov 2010
        • 7988

        #63
        Originally posted by DracoM View Post
        No it doesn't.
        ISIS massacre thousands as a matter of policy.
        Did the Puritans?
        Some Catholics killed Protestants; some Protestants killed Catholics; some Catholics killed other Catholics; and probably some Protestants killed other Protestants. All as a matter of policy, because they didn't agree with the others' interpretation of Christianity, or idea of God, or how he should be worshipped.

        Comment

        • Flosshilde
          Full Member
          • Nov 2010
          • 7988

          #64
          Originally posted by Pabmusic View Post
          Well, at 400 years' remove. There seems to be an implication here of "who are we to criticise?". If that's so, then it's very muddled thinking indeed.
          I don't think it's muddled. You could say that as Islam was founded 400 or so years after Christianity they're at the 'stage' 'we' were at 400 or so years ago. I don't think it's an excuse, though, & unfortunately as they are happy to use modern technology when it suits them, the destruction (of people and artefacts) is all the greater.

          Comment

          • french frank
            Administrator/Moderator
            • Feb 2007
            • 30534

            #65
            Originally posted by Flosshilde View Post
            You could say that as Islam was founded 400 or so years after Christianity they're at the 'stage' 'we' were at 400 or so years ago.
            Well … you could, I suppose, but that would be very muddled thinking …

            As far as I can see, even non-IS Muslims destroy Islamic artefacts. This makes one wonder whether 'art' should be allowed to exist at all. Are creative artists happy to devote all their effort to creating, knowing that within 30 years, 3 years or 3 weeks it is likely to be destroyed?
            It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.

            Comment

            • MrGongGong
              Full Member
              • Nov 2010
              • 18357

              #66
              Originally posted by french frank View Post
              Are creative artists happy to devote all their effort to creating, knowing that within 30 years, 3 years or 3 weeks it is likely to be destroyed?
              Of course they are and many make work with the precise intention that it should have a short lifespan Andy Goldsworthy being one of many.






              It does take a certain type of arrogance to think that ones creative efforts are somehow for "all time".
              Most music isn't created with the intention of making a huge historical gesture.

              Though i'm not sure that we need to destroy to create room for new things.

              Comment

              • french frank
                Administrator/Moderator
                • Feb 2007
                • 30534

                #67
                Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
                Though i'm not sure that we need to destroy to create room for new things.
                I'm sure we don't. And am happy for it to be left to posterity (rather than ideology) to decide what survives and what doesn't.

                I don't think it's arrogance to hope or want one's work to survive longer than 'l'espace d'un matin'.
                It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.

                Comment

                • Honoured Guest

                  #68
                  Originally posted by jean View Post
                  The iconoclasm of ISIS follows precisely that of our own dear Puritans, doesn't it?
                  Yes, indeed. And the fate of Anne Boleyn seems familiar. And, earlier, the activities of the Crusaders.

                  But my starting point for the thread was not the motivations of IS or Henry VIII, or even the violence of their transitional activities, but more how the world after their iconoclastic actions is different from the world before them. While the physical artefacts of the past exist, so much energy is spent on conserving them, but once they no longer exist this option is not available to people, and everyone necessarily has to deal with the artefacts of the present and the future.

                  Comment

                  • MrGongGong
                    Full Member
                    • Nov 2010
                    • 18357

                    #69
                    Originally posted by french frank View Post

                    I don't think it's arrogance to hope or want one's work to survive longer than 'l'espace d'un matin'.
                    Maybe that's not the right word?
                    I've just spent 2 weeks orchestrating a big piece which will only ever be played once which is fine be me.....it's a question that often comes up when one writes music.

                    Comment

                    • Honoured Guest

                      #70
                      Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
                      Maybe that's not the right word?
                      I've just spent 2 weeks orchestrating a big piece which will only ever be played once which is fine be me.....it's a question that often comes up when one writes music.
                      Tell me if I'm wrong (of course!) but am I right in thinking that your main purpose in orchestrating this piece is to facilitate a meaningful musical experience for the performers who you hope will be stimulated by their experience, which will further their musical and social development, and will hopefully contribute to encouraging and enabling their own future creative lives. In other words, your orchestration is not an artefact to be preserved but an integral part of a living creative culture. So it has a purpose in the present and for the future! It will live on for evermore in its effects!

                      Comment

                      • DracoM
                        Host
                        • Mar 2007
                        • 12995

                        #71
                        Originally posted by Flosshilde View Post
                        Some Catholics killed Protestants; some Protestants killed Catholics; some Catholics killed other Catholics; and probably some Protestants killed other Protestants. All as a matter of policy, because they didn't agree with the others' interpretation of Christianity, or idea of God, or how he should be worshipped.
                        Fully accept and loathe the nastiness outlined, but might the difference be that ISIS / -al-Shabab / Boko Haram et al specifically and quite deliberately and systematically single out non-Muslims to massacre. Not sure even the appalling Crusaders murdered all Jews, or all Muslims they came across, did they? ISIS apparently do, but can allow converts to live.

                        Baffled by complexity - as usual - in such matters.

                        Comment

                        • MrGongGong
                          Full Member
                          • Nov 2010
                          • 18357

                          #72
                          Originally posted by Honoured Guest View Post
                          Tell me if I'm wrong (of course!) but am I right in thinking that your main purpose in orchestrating this piece is to facilitate a meaningful musical experience for the performers who you hope will be stimulated by their experience, which will further their musical and social development, and will hopefully contribute to encouraging and enabling their own future creative lives. In other words, your orchestration is not an artefact to be preserved but an integral part of a living creative culture. So it has a purpose in the present and for the future! It will live on for evermore in its effects!
                          erm

                          I think some people might come and listen as well
                          and I was planning to buy some cheese with the proceeds

                          (back later .......... bar 247 beckons)

                          Comment

                          • MrGongGong
                            Full Member
                            • Nov 2010
                            • 18357

                            #73
                            Originally posted by DracoM View Post
                            . Not sure even the appalling Crusaders murdered all Jews, or all Muslims they came across, did they?
                            Béziers?

                            Comment

                            • Anastasius
                              Full Member
                              • Mar 2015
                              • 1860

                              #74
                              Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
                              Maybe that's not the right word?
                              I've just spent 2 weeks orchestrating a big piece which will only ever be played once which is fine be me.....it's a question that often comes up when one writes music.
                              There is a school of thought that even one performance of many modern compositions is one too much
                              Fewer Smart things. More smart people.

                              Comment

                              • mercia
                                Full Member
                                • Nov 2010
                                • 8920

                                #75
                                I suppose the idea of actively preserving the past is a comparatively recent one (Victorian ?) - previously we seemed to be quite happy for buildings to gently fall into decay, some of Henry VIII's palaces were ruins within fifty years of being built.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X