HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Aug. 13, 2006 I was flipping through the local newspaper a few weeks ago and came across an article written by a columnist dealing with the contribution made by visible minorities to western culture ,more specifically modern western culture. At first I thought that this was a tongue in cheek way of sneering at minorities ,especially those from the Carribean. I read it again and lo and behold I came to the conclusion that the guy was serious. Not only did he believe that minorities were responsible for modern western culture, but also that it was OK,(modern western culture). I know I do not occupy the intellectual high ground, the sole domain of those with a degree in journalism. Neither am I able to see as clearly ,or take such an unbiased middle of the road position as would a journalist, but I can read. Did not modern western culture originate with the nineteenth century philosophers who discounted the previous culture consisting of : Burkhardt (The last gasp of Aryanism), Shleyer (Indo Eurasian beginning of Europeans), Nietchez (rejoice in the western collapse as it will re introduce Aryanism, Marx (no need to elaborate),followed by Camus, Sontong, Gore etc. Cultural trends were originally set by those who could afford to consume it. One needed to be among the upper classes during the medieval and renaissance times in order to be able to attend plays musical event etc. During the Greek and Roman period there seemed to be a greater sense of egalitarianism as just about anyone who was not a slave could wander in.(Then I could be wrong as the same could be applied to Shakespeare).What was meaningful to the needs of society and what influenced present events whether occurring in the past or present eventually came to be viewed, listened to or read ,what was not pertinent to a societies needs was not. And now we come to that great leveler of culture: the printing press. Once everything had to be laboriously hand written and copied hundreds of times. Wood cuts allowed a greater number of works to be produced, moveable type even more until a point was reached where nearly any one could be published (and was). With volume came dross. I am not implying that those to poor to be published were no good anyway, it is just that with so many works published there was a general decline in the standards. Those nineteenth century philosophers would have had a hard time getting published in prior times; with a mass audience things were easier. In the audio field there was a similar degradation of culture. Once upon a time one needed to shell out a lot of money to attend the Vienna Opera or the London Philhormic. One did not hear such popular songs as 'There's a Tavern in a Town' here. No these were confined to village square or the local pub where they belonged as they had no logical place in the ordering of a society. Advanced technology now allows any one to consume thus creating producers who play to a mass market. At the risk of appearing an elitist I will state that all societies produce a small number who are more intelligent than the rest. Culture rests with these as they use it is a means of communicating with there peers also in a position to order society. In effect culture is a type of dialogue between those who have something relevant to say. Modern culture is bereft of intelligence ,in the main catering to those who refuse to think (The answer my friend is blowin' in the wind).Minorities came on to the western cultural scene long after the damage had been done and should not be blamed .In fact they too are victims of modern technology as witness their folk songs and plays perverted into political slogans. It is that time of year. The Caribbean festivals ,Mardi Grass et al are being staged and it now time for the so called liberals to again trumpet their tired messages of egalitarianism.
http://www.geocities.com/manzikertca/
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
