 |
|
Ethelred
|
|
I wasn't intending to say he was stupid. Just that Culture isn't a sign of much except Art rather than anything else. Nothing in it is inherently superior except in artistic terms and even that is a matter of opinion, see Combat Ingrid for an example of a different oppinion on what constitutes good art.
Me, I am listening to E. Power Biggs playing Bach organ music, specificaly The Great Fugue in G minor BWV 542 . Not in the mood for rock of any kind at the moment, much less brain burning stuff like death metal. Sometimes even rock that I really like makes my brain buzz, especially when I need more sleep.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ethelred
|
|
Not Santa Claus himself. Just the Fat Jolly version. With all that red and white.
Although the Snopes Urban Legends site tries to claim that the standard came earlier they are glossing over the fact that it wasn't actually standard till Coke started its add campaigns.
http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/santa.asp
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pandemoniak
|
 |
of Xanadu, French Section of the Apolyton Must Crush Capitalism Party
Jul 2002 time: 06:22
|
|
Dont make the huge mistake to think LA could be a cultural capitol just because of Hollywood. Even considering Hollywoodians films as culture, as I do, the cinematic grammar has been invented in NY, regarding the USA. And actually, France and ex-URSS have had, about cinema, much more influence than any other place. Hollywood has created a genre of films, which was famous during the late 40's and 50's, and which is called "Hollywoodian classic". This genre of film is not totally outdated, but it is obviously not the mainstream of nowadays culture.
And if you consider LA highest culture place in the world because thats where many films are done, change your vote to Marocco, since thats the place were about 90% of mainstreams films are made. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pandemoniak
|
 |
of Xanadu, French Section of the Apolyton Must Crush Capitalism Party
Jul 2002 time: 06:22
|
|
Sure Wernazuma, you got a point. But Bollywood (the name for the indian large industry of films) has certainly a lesser influence than mainstream occidental films, thats why I didnt really considered the option. But to me, Hollywood certainly doesnt make LA a cultural city.
I voted Paris for many reasons (first may be chauvinism ) : highest rate of cinemas per citizen, croassroad of old and new culture, high academic place, good situation in the Old World Europe (not a crossroad of Europe like Brussels or Strasbourg, but theres definetely more different cultures in Paris than in London...), high touristic place, etc...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ethelred
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Pandemoniak
Dont make the huge mistake to think LA could be a cultural capitol just because of Hollywood. Even considering Hollywoodians films as culture, as I do, the cinematic grammar has been invented in NY, regarding the USA. And actually, France and ex-URSS have had, about cinema, much more influence than any other place. |
Hardly. One director form the USSR and a few from France have indeed affected directors methods and styles. How many filmgoers have had their lives influenced by Sergei Esenstein? How many by any one of dozens of American film makers?
quote:
This genre of film is not totally outdated, but it is obviously not the mainstream of nowadays culture.
|
Creating genres again is not the same as influencing the average person. I think you understate the influence of Hollywood in filmmaking outside of the US in any case.
quote:
And if you consider LA highest culture place in the world because thats where many films are done, change your vote to Marocco, since thats the place were about 90% of mainstreams films are made. |
First I didn't call LA high culture. Just the most influential place in the world on other people's culture. Second, just how many films have you seen from India versus Hollywood. India churns out movies for a simple reason. They have lots of movie theaters and a shortage of TV so people go to see movies in India instead of watch TV. The US churns out at least a much mass entertainment as Bollywood does in India. Its just not as many movies as in India.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
JohnT

|
 |
Capitalist
Mar 1999 time: 00:22
|
|
Yeah, I'm the one who voted for Atlanta. So, sue me. Coca-Cola, CNN, Gone with the Wind, MLK and the modern Civil Rights movement, and yes, the modern incantation of Santa Claus (fat, red, jolly) were all born in Atlanta and I for one am proud of it. After all, no less an expert on modern American city life than Tom Wolfe selected Atlanta and it's culture as the setting of his second novel A Man in Full.
But, in a way, I'm not proud of Atlanta at all. Many of you are looking at "culture" only in a positive light, but there is quite a pernicious influence the city of Atlanta has had in the development of modern American cities and culture, and it is clearly expressed in one word: homogenization. Atlanta is the modern city par excellence (sp?). It represents the corporatization of America to such a degree that it is impossible for insiders to see it.
Let me quote from Dan Simmons' Carrion Comfort:
quote: We arrived in Atlanta at a little after three in the morning. I had never liked Atlanta. It lacked all of the grace and charm which typified (Southern) culture and, as if to show its continued disregard for Southern style, it sprawled now in all directions, an endless series of industrial parks and formless housing developments. |
This, in essence, is modern Atlanta, a form of city that first took root in the Deep South in the mid-70's and has spread throughout the country so that now most every city is nothing but a ceaseless parade of shopping malls, bar 'n grills, McMansions, endless ribbons of interstates, with no local identity of it's own. You go to Atlanta and you might as well have seen Jacksonville, Charlotte, Houston, Nashville, Seattle, or most any large city in the US. Sure, New York, LA, and Boston all have their charms, but they, too, are being overwhelmed by the creeping "bland-ization" that has made it almost impossible to tell one modern American city from another. Dan Simmons is spot-on: Atlanta is a city with no respect for its past and its success is leading the entire country (and possibly the world) to the same fate.
Most culturally influential in the world? Probably not in the sense that y'all are thinking, but the "Atlanta-ization" of modern cities is continuing unabated. Consider yourself warned.
Last edited by JohnT on 14-10-2002 at 09:32
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22. Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|