Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Blogs
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Progressive Music as Objective Music
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedProgressive Music as Objective Music

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
ProgressiveAttic View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Eclectic Prog Team

Joined: April 05 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1243
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Progressive Music as Objective Music
    Posted: April 13 2010 at 21:53
Originally posted by VanVanVan VanVanVan wrote:

This thread really interests me. I've read the Fountainhead once and Atlas Shrugged twice, and while I think that some of Ayn Rand's ideas are absolutely batsh*t insane and that the woman herself was nothing short of ridiculous to the point of hilarity, I do agree with a lot of what she said. 
That said, I can see where the OP is coming from with calling progressive rock objective music. The obvious connection is to [Atlas Shrugged character] Richard Halley, who (like many prog musicians) wrote his music not for any sort of acclaim but as an expression of himself; nothing more. He did not write it for anyone else, he wrote for himself. I certainly think that prog embodies this musical better than any other philosophy, but I don't know if that means you can call it purely objective music.
Brilliant idea; though, I never would have thought of this.


That is precisely the idea!

Thanks! I actually got inspired while reading to Richard Halley's words in Atlas Shrugged

Nonetheless I do think that Rand's philosophy is for the most part correct... but I have to admit that she was a bit (well...more than a bit)crazy...

Edited by ProgressiveAttic - April 13 2010 at 22:01
Michael's Sonic Kaleidoscope Mondays 5:00pm EST(re-runs Thursdays 3:00pm) @ Delicious Agony Progressive Rock Radio(http://www.deliciousagony.com)
Back to Top
VanVanVan View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 756
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2010 at 21:35
This thread really interests me. I've read the Fountainhead once and Atlas Shrugged twice, and while I think that some of Ayn Rand's ideas are absolutely batsh*t insane and that the woman herself was nothing short of ridiculous to the point of hilarity, I do agree with a lot of what she said. 

That said, I can see where the OP is coming from with calling progressive rock objective music. The obvious connection is to [Atlas Shrugged character] Richard Halley, who (like many prog musicians) wrote his music not for any sort of acclaim but as an expression of himself; nothing more. He did not write it for anyone else, he wrote for himself. I certainly think that prog embodies this musical better than any other philosophy, but I don't know if that means you can call it purely objective music.

Brilliant idea; though, I never would have thought of this.
"The meaning of life is to give life meaning."-Arjen Lucassen
Back to Top
progpositivity View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: December 15 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 262
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 13 2010 at 21:03
In Ryand's vision, authority figures tyranically squelch individual expression.  The antidote is the elevation of the individual's self-interest above all else.  One appeal of Objectivism is its celebration of the autonomy and value of the individual. 
 
I *do* see a connection to Progrock or Avant music in that they can be somewhat contrarian (even self-righteous), daring to stand up for what it believes in despite ridicule and persecution.  No doubt, some of the Objectivism's ideas are positive and constructive. 
 
Ironically, when put into practice in the real world, the philosophy of Objectivism insists upon such singular devotion to the *self* that it squelches individual expression of ideas that are deemed "altruistic" or "non-objective".  In so doing, it sadly degenerates into one of the things it so passionately seeks to prevent:  a form of tyrrany against individuals who don't conform to its established requirements.  So, in a most unusual and unanticipated way, within the social setting of the real world, time and again Objectivism becomes the very monster it promises its followers that it will defeat.
 
These are not abstract and unfounded accusations.  This is what a dispassionate person can witness time and again wherever the tenets of Objectivism are implemented within a social (group) setting. 
The first (but not only) case study to observe is the Objectivism put into action by Ann Ryand within her own social circle.  This is well documented.  I don't need to go into the details here.
 
Objectivism, despite its good in promoting responsibility and encouraging self-reliance, neglects to dig deeply into the communal aspect of humanity.  It fails to recognize how deeply and intricately altruism and self-interest are interwoven one within another in the human psyche.  Indeed, a full development of  *community* is a little neglected within Objectivist thought, is it not?  Yes, we are all individuals that must not get subsumed by a greater whole.  But are we not also, by our very nature, social beings that wither and fall if isolated from a greater whole?   We live so much of our lives in groups (families, workplaces, towns, counties, countries) - not in silos of self empowered isolation. 
 
Ryand called Objectivism a philosophy for living, But I suggest that we "live" more fully when both self interest and altruism coexist...  This need not be an "either / or" proposition. 
 
To quote a certain 'philosopher' out of context...  I'll just say that I belive "self interest" and "altruism" can be united into a "single, perfect sphere". 
Positively the best Prog and Fusion 24/7!
http://www.progpositivity.com
Back to Top
ProgressiveAttic View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Eclectic Prog Team

Joined: April 05 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1243
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2010 at 20:19
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:


Originally posted by ProgressiveAttic ProgressiveAttic wrote:

There are reasons to believe (and many economists think so) that the cause of the crisis was government intervention... but since I am not from the U.S. (and this isn't the political discussions thread) I won't go any further...
yyyeeaaahh I don't know about that, chicken & egg-- it's like saying your doctor made you sick.  Also it depends what intervention you speak of;  Before the crisis?  During?  After?  Do you mean imprudent real estate allowances and home loans?  Corporate regulation/deregulation?  What, man, what?


I don't believe in Keynes' theory that the state should play the role of "doctor" in economy because the government has power and definite functions (police, tribunals and army) and it is dangerous to give to it more power and responsibilities (believe me...I live in Venezuela which now days is the example of what happens when you take that to an extreme)... anyways, as I said before I prefer not to comment about a country that isn't my own...(if you want to discuss about it I have no problem )
but if you insist... here is a link for you to read (it is just an opinion that I find logical): http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=24015
Michael's Sonic Kaleidoscope Mondays 5:00pm EST(re-runs Thursdays 3:00pm) @ Delicious Agony Progressive Rock Radio(http://www.deliciousagony.com)
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 59817
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2010 at 20:03
Originally posted by ProgressiveAttic ProgressiveAttic wrote:


There are reasons to believe (and many economists think so) that the cause of the crisis was government intervention... but since I am not from the U.S. (and this isn't the political discussions thread) I won't go any further...


yyyeeaaahh I don't know about that, chicken & egg-- it's like saying your doctor made you sick.  Also it depends what intervention you speak of;  Before the crisis?  During?  After?  Do you mean imprudent real estate allowances and home loans?  Corporate regulation/deregulation?  What, man, what?


Back to Top
ProgressiveAttic View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Eclectic Prog Team

Joined: April 05 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1243
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2010 at 19:52
Originally posted by Raff Raff wrote:


Originally posted by Bonnek Bonnek wrote:


4.     The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism.--> Yeah right, I think we've seen the last two years that this is complete nonsense. Even hard-core capitalist wouldn't believe that anymore.
You would be surprised at how many people still believe that, at least here in the USUnhappy. It seems like the events of the past two years never happened for them.

There are reasons to believe (and many economists think so) that the cause of the crisis was government intervention... but since I am not from the U.S. (and this isn't the political discussions thread) I won't go any further...
Michael's Sonic Kaleidoscope Mondays 5:00pm EST(re-runs Thursdays 3:00pm) @ Delicious Agony Progressive Rock Radio(http://www.deliciousagony.com)
Back to Top
Bonnek View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Metal Team

Joined: September 01 2009
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 4493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2010 at 07:04
"at least here in the US"
-->Phew you must be an early riser. And immediately checking the forum. That's what I call prog dedication Clap
It's actually quite frightening what you say. I thought hardcore capitalism was given more critical thought in US as well.

Back to Top
Raff View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
RIO/Avant/Zeuhl Team

Joined: July 29 2005
Location: Alexandria, Va
Status: Offline
Points: 23386
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2010 at 06:41
Originally posted by Bonnek Bonnek wrote:


4.     The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism.

--> Yeah right, I think we've seen the last two years that this is complete nonsense. Even hard-core capitalist wouldn't believe that anymore.



You would be surprised at how many people still believe that, at least here in the USUnhappy. It seems like the events of the past two years never happened for them.
Back to Top
Bonnek View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Metal Team

Joined: September 01 2009
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 4493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 21 2010 at 06:01
I have a knack for joining threads after all life and interest have left them.
Here's my 2 cents anyway.

1.     Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.
--> What a strange thesis.
As if feelings, wishes, hopes or fears aren't equally real as reality. Besides, we can only see reality through our subjective senses so objective reality remains unknown to all of us.

2.     Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s senses) is man’s only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.
--> Dream on. I might prefer it if reason would guide our actions, but I'd say were probably even more driven by instinct and emotion.

3.     Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.
--> That's simply romantic individualistic overstatement. But it seems like Rand had at least a good feeling of where things would head with society in the 21st century (western society at least). I'd say an individual is nothing without recognition within a social group. We're social animals as much as predators. There's not much thought gone in this philosophy really...

4.     The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism.

--> Yeah right, I think we've seen the last two years that this is complete nonsense. Even hard-core capitalist wouldn't believe that anymore.

I once read one book from her. I suck at titles but it was something about an architect. I managed to survive it for 3/4 of its length. It's a great defence of artistic integrity and unbound creativity. Which is great, but I can't relate it to all 4 points of her philosophy. I guess she was relevant at her time but like many philosophers she seems not to realize that our complex reality will never be described with just one theory.

PS. When it comes to music, I'd say point 1,2 and 3 are the credo of black metal rather then prog.


Edited by Bonnek - January 21 2010 at 06:02
Back to Top
ProgressiveAttic View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Eclectic Prog Team

Joined: April 05 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1243
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 02 2010 at 20:50
Originally posted by PabloVzla PabloVzla wrote:

I notice a Vytas Brenner cover album...are you venezuelan.


Yep and a huge fan of Vytas'

Edited by ProgressiveAttic - January 02 2010 at 20:51
Michael's Sonic Kaleidoscope Mondays 5:00pm EST(re-runs Thursdays 3:00pm) @ Delicious Agony Progressive Rock Radio(http://www.deliciousagony.com)
Back to Top
PabloVzla View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: December 31 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 31 2009 at 19:54
I notice a Vytas Brenner cover album...are you venezuelan.
Back to Top
jv_neXus View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: December 06 2009
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 28 2009 at 20:12
Originally posted by freyacat freyacat wrote:

That's why even Rush grew up and left her behind.


Haha, I laughed at that one.  I was the same way though.  At one time I was a huge fan of Ayn Rand, reading Anthem, Fountainhead (which I still think is a very good book at least for the individualism in art aspect), and Atlas Shrugged.  I "grew up" though and moved onto bigger and better things philosophically.


Edited by jv_neXus - December 28 2009 at 20:14
"The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion." -Albert Camus
Back to Top
fmotp View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: August 04 2009
Location: Pekin, IL
Status: Offline
Points: 7
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 26 2009 at 09:46
I hate it when I'm almost done with what I've written, and then I inadvertently erase it by hitting a button by mistake.  In light of this, here is a much shorter response to this thread.  The writer assumes that lovers of prog music are by definition more intelligent or rational than lovers of "pop" music.  This is simply unprovable.  He also assumes that rationality in music is necessarily a good thing.   It's not.  The root appeal of music is emotional. I love King Crimson's music.  I also like Rihanna's and Billy Joel's music, examples of so-called "pop" music.   
Prog lover, proud parent, teacher, and Christian
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5898
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 19 2009 at 04:20
This thread makes me want to start one about how Frank Zappa was the Friedrich Nietzsche of rock music. Hell, it's not just the entire sarcastic iconoclast thing, as well as structuring their works in a chaotic manner, they also both had huge moustaches and are often accused of misogyny... and Nietzsche did compose a bit of music for that matter.

(that said, there's other planned prog blogs of mine that I'm much more interested in)
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook
Back to Top
freyacat View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 17 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 140
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 18 2009 at 16:15
Did anyone ever see the Simpsons' take on the "Ayn Rand Day Care Center"?  Little Maggie and the rest of the babies were left to fend for themselves.

Progressive Rock has too much love to be involved with Ayn Rand.  That's why even Rush grew up and left her behind.
sad creature nailed upon the coloured door of time
Back to Top
jv_neXus View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: December 06 2009
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2009 at 09:33
Can't progressive music be constructivist music?
Sorry Time Signature, I didn't see your post before I posted mine.  Looks like I wasn't the first person to make that observation.
"The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion." -Albert Camus
Back to Top
jv_neXus View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: December 06 2009
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2009 at 08:55
I have read a small fraction of the posts on this topic but I have to say that I was immediately struck by the initial argument.  I have read three of Rand's fiction books on objectivism (Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged, and Anthem) and I have to say that I have a pretty good understanding of the philosophy.  Good enough to understand where the philosophy starts to contradict human nature as much as Collectivism does (that is a later topic for another day).  But my point is this, Progressive Rock, at least to me, has absolutely no representation of Objectivism (even though I see where all of you are coming from with the individualist aspect) because of one of the main points you originally asserted contradicts the nature of Progressive Rock.

Even though Objectivism is largely an individualist philosophy, it still asserts the idea that there is NO subjective reality.  meaning:  reality is completely concrete, unchangedable, and finite.  1. If you ask any quantum physics professor if they believed this they would probably start laughing, and 2. That in no way represents progressive rock.  Progressive Rock (even though its highly individualist) represents a constructed form of expression by whoever is playing or composing it.  It has no finite properties, it is probably the most infinite form of music.  Trying to call it objectivist is quite appalling coming from a writer and musician who composes a lot of progressive pieces.  If you wish to nail down Progressive Rock into a specific philosophy (which would also contradict its nature, because you are trying to shove it into another genre) then check out constructivism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivist_epistemology

The basic idea is that the true nature of external reality is completely separate from human cognition.  Meaning, what we see is an illusion of what is really there because of what our limited senses "construct" for us to see.  Any one could really see the world in anyway they like depending upon how they program their brain to perceive the world.  This is becoming a very large topic in the scientific community as they are becoming more and more aware of how limited human sensory perception is, and how infinite the universe is.
"The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion." -Albert Camus
Back to Top
Time Signature View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 20 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 362
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 05 2009 at 10:24
Can't progressive music be constructivist music?
This user has left the PA fora, but will occasionally post reviews so as to support artists.
Back to Top
sealchan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 12 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 179
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 25 2009 at 17:16
Quote
Excerpts form Rand's "ROMANTIC MANIFESTO":

"Philosophically, Romanticism is a crusade to glorify man’s existence; psychologically, it is experienced simply as the desire to make life interesting."

"What the Romanticists brought to art was the primacy of values, an element that had been missing in the stale, arid, third- and fourth-hand (and rate) repetitions of the Classicists’ formula-copying. Values (and value-judgments) are the source of emotions; a great deal of emotional intensity was projected in the work of the Romanticists and in the reactions of their audiences, as well as a great deal of color, imagination, originality, excitement and all the other consequences of a value-oriented view of life. This emotional element was the most easily perceivable characteristic of the new movement and it was taken as its defining characteristic, without deeper inquiry.

Such issues as the fact that the primacy of values in human life is not an irreducible primary, that it rests on man’s faculty of volition, and, therefore, that the Romanticists, philosophically, were the champions of volition (which is the root of values) and not of emotions (which are merely the consequences)—were issues to be defined by philosophers, who defaulted in regard to esthetics as they did in regard to every other crucial aspect of the nineteenth century.

The still deeper issue, the fact that the faculty of reason is the faculty of volition, was not known at the time, and the various theories of free will were for the most part of an anti-rational character, thus reinforcing the association of volition with mysticism."
 
...it's fun to philosophize just before the weekend...
 
I wonder if Rand uses mysticism in a primarily negative context...it is an interesting trait, if so, since intuition (the 'N' in NT) is the primary cognitive function supporting mystic thought and I suspect a strenght in her personality.  Sensation, which tends to eschew, or be enraptured by, mysticism was probably in Rand's shadow...if she undervalued it.  But if she had done some significant shadow (as in the Jungian meaning of shadow) work, her philosophy might be an effort to champion her own weakness...a good way to creatively produce a multi-modal perspective.
 
I've been tempted to pick up one of her philosophical works.
Back to Top
sealchan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 12 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 179
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 25 2009 at 17:08
Oh and anyone who wants to use the phrase "brain-colored glasses" I encourage you to do so.  I just Googled the phrase and saw that there were no results for this.  This is my chance to be famous!  LOL
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.086 seconds.