Why do we always have to hate somebody or somthing to express that we like somthing else.

Can't it be enough to say, "IMHO what Goldsmith did with Hollow Man wasn't really that great....but 13th Warrior rocked." It doesnt have to be, "God that Goldsmith really *ucked up Hollow Man I HATE HIM!!"

And the endless, "I like Zimmer so I have to hate Goldsmith," or vise versa debate has just gotta end.

We all love film music. Thats a fact. So why at a site that brings so many people together from around the country and world do we have to be so negative? Its hard enough trying to explain to other human beings why we find this music to be moving and wonderful, and then have to come here and defend ourselves against fellow fans and friends.

I don't post here nearly enough and I want to change that. I wan't to try to make this place a more posative enviornment.

Dave

NP : Gladiator's Waltz

About every week someone comes along to say what you do: we all love film music so can't we all just get along, find common ground, be polite, use uncoarse language, have respect, if not for the work at least for the composer as a man, and the opinions and feelings of other collectors. Name calling is silly and pointless and doesn't teach us anything or "get us ahead".

Yecch! [Sounds of Lou vomiting thick green bile] How did this world get so filled with pansy diplomats?

If I did what you say, not only would I be wimping out on my convictions but all the fun would be gone and this place would be as dull to me as a ghost town. Wind. Dust. Tumbleweeds.

Art makes me feel and bad art makes me feel bad.

I'm gonna put it out there in no uncertain terms because that expresses the joy & ecstasy or nausea & revulsion I feel about the composers and their personalities.

The idea of sitting in a circle, holding hands around a campfire, and singing Cumbaya with people who promote loser composers who are destroying my cherished artform ain't gonna happen with me pal. It may make them more defensive, but I'm here to give those guys a hard time. No one wins my affection just cuz we've got similar tastes.

So, get used to the rumbles and roll up yer sleeves.....

More and more it seems that Allan Bloom was correct in his book The Closing of the American Mind: no one takes a stand, people think facts are relative, openess and consensus are valued over truth.

Finding worth in the arts is subjective. I can't say Horner isn't vital in the same way I can say water is H2O. But that doesn't mean there is no truth, no way to compare, no standards against which things artistic can be measured.

The search for that truth, the love of that search, the promotion of what we find along the path, in addition to passing on information to others, and getting music into the hands of others who want it is the majority of what goes on here at the board. This activity, effort, quest, whatever you call it, shouldn't (in my opinion, maybe not the Kommandant's) be fitted into any mold or pattern or etiquette or rules. I think that's where we lose out.

After I slammed Enemy at the Gates into pulp and many others followed, one lone member posted, "Well, I picked it up and I think it's fine." And if that's what he wants to say after listening to the intense heat of everyone's derision, then that's perfect, that's how it should be. That's true debate, charge and counter charge. As long as that is going on, this place is healthy. Your dream vision to transcend that and transport us to some PC paradise is nothing more than a cloning factory producing pod people. What's next, songs about how great it is to work with my comrades in the Soviet?

NP: The Right Stuff (The Stick Man)

I own scores, at least 5 for most, of the composers working today, and I do not dislike any of them.

Its unfortunate the people have to scream about how they hate Horner and Zimmer...the two who get most of the criticism of late, as if they were some cancer on the genre. All composers working today have brought something knew or interesting to the table throughout their careers.

I don't think any composers deserve the vehemence that runs rampant around here, in the same vein that I don't feel anyone should uphold a score simply because they place the composer on a pedestal.

There is something to said for respecting others opinions, whether you agree with them or not. It makes it much harder for people to respect and value your opinion when you can’t respect theirs. When you personalize an argument and say “Well, you’re a wanker for liking this score” all you are really doing is helping them decide that you don’t have any other evidence besides vitriol to spend in defending your position.

Further, exactly what truths do you hope to divine from people’s OPINIONS? They are truth in the same way that the people chose their favorite color. Your opinion about their likes and dislikes is no more valid than theirs.

I understand your desire to be provocative and to stir debate, but don’t you find it rather pointless to tell people how much you hate something and then say if disagree they are idiots and sycophants and that they only why to really argue is to just as confrontational? Is there no room for logically constructed, non-emotional debate in your world view?

The Closing of the American Mind was an excellent inquiry into the state of the American University system and higher education in general and I don’t think that Alan Bloom was talking about “talking a stand” on completely subjective matters. If I recall correctly he was addressing the timidity of tenured professors from taking any stance on an issue even though tenure was specifically designed to allow them to do so.

Dave:

I think that one of the reasons that people tend to do this is for validation. They want people to agree with them and validate their viewpoints.

However, in an environment that promotes anonymity like the Internet, people tend to feel that they can say and do anything they want because there are no consequences for their actions. As a result people tend to become more extreme and less moderate.

I am not suggesting that people not have opinions. Or not become upset or joyfull. I just find it unproductive and very shallow to validate an opinion by saying that someone else 'sucks' or is a 'hack'. That doesn't explain anything. It is the lowest common denomenator. Give vailid thought out reasons for your feelings and opinions. Sarcasam and rudeness are very hard to distinguish on message boards.

I am very open to peoples opinions and love debate. But when such little information is given on ones 'hate' for a composer or score it is difficult to respond. Or to even understand where they are coming from. Their opinion is lost in obscurity and lack of thought.

I have never suggested that we sit around campfires and hold hands and be happy little campers. I never said to wimp out and hold back on your convictions. But if the only way you can express yourself is to butt heads and try to piss people off...it makes me wonder how serious I should take you. Do you have an honest opinion to express or are you just messing around to get your rocks off.

The world of the internet is great because it can bring so many people together. But the downside is it brings out alot of jerks...this doesn't apply to you Lou . All I am saying is express your self more clearly. The more you say the better your opinion or view will come across on the internet. None of us can see the others exprsssions, or reflections in the voices on the screen...even with all these goofy faces to choose from.

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh my fingers are tired from typing now.

dave

NP : Meet Joe Black

PS thanks for the kind words Quill and MW!

Hey I speak, maybe I don't have anything to say but the same tired things, maybe I have choice insights. You can decide if I have any content yourself. I don't care if you respect my opinions or even read my posts. You can write me off if you want.

Yes, Bloom's book was mostly about the sorry state of universities but he also confronts the philosophies underlying student thought and that was my referrence.

I do respect other people's opinions even as I attack them ad hominem. It's just that I prefer to act like the crazed prophets and zen masters of old that disrespected manners and refinement by being dirty, disobedient, and by letting the mushrooms grow behind their ears. Harpo Marx. Abbie Hoffman's Revolution for the Hell of It.

But I think we're both telling Dave the same thing. You are explaining why it is unlikely his dream of moderation can come about and I'm demonstrating why it can't by acting like a leper with oozing sores and aiming a long smelly fart in his direction.

The ironic thing is that the same people who look at me and call me Caliban probably go to the movies to cheer on characters who act much more independently or represent philosophies far more rude and repulsive than anything I act out. It's like, "Oh Lou, grow up," and then they go to see severed heads in Gladiator: "That was so Cool!"

Dave--I am a jerk, don't take me seriously. I'm rude, just acid with no other purpose. I'm not polite or a great brain. I'm a neanderthal. I can't even spell. I don't have anything to say so I grunt my despair at those who act my betters. All that's left for me is to act the street person to prissy cultured types like you and MWR and Scott and throw mud at you the way the guys throw mud at Catherine Deneuve in Belle De Jour. I'm not interested in debate, only nihilistic destruction. Have a nice day.

dave

PS: Lou....you are sounding rather well spoken in your defence of being a neanderthal. Grunt Grunt.

I would never write you off. If I thought your views were unworthy of examination and discussion, I wouldn't bother replying to you. I don't always agree with you, but as a the resident termagant (sans the female aspect) your diatribes are well written and certainly draw attention, which I suppose is the point after all.

A 'bit' stuffy? Try the whole pillow factory.

I don't know what you're like in person, but I can't read one of your posts without picturing an old German college professor like Emil Jannings in The Blue Angel or a tall thin tweedy type of the English variety.

This may not apply to you directly MWR, but nothing gets my porcupine quills up more than the condescending tone of the polished elite: "Surely you're joking Mr. Feynman, Heh. Heh. Heh." Yeah, up yours.

Quills? Hmmm. Is Quill called Quill because he writes or because he's a pain you can't easily pull away from?

Of course, I can't read my own posts without thinking of King Kong, The Hell's Angels, and Mount Vesuvius.

I come here for a lot of reasons. Sometimes I have something interesting to say. Other times I'm just BS-ing just to talk and kill time (like now). Sometimes kernals, sometimes crap. Mostly crap. But I can't stand these bland quiche-eater peace-loving types who want to turn discourse into processed homogenized cheez-wiz. These guys need a taste of the streets thrown at them.

Termagant. Termagant? What the...? I'm sorry, that one's not in my prole dictionary. Why don't you just say I like to fight or chide people for chrissakes. I saw the T-word the first thing I thought was Godzilla vs Termagant, like a half termite half ant creature. Turns out it's worse than that. It's just the guy who used it showing off he's read too many books.

Sorry MWR. I think you can do it all. Have ideas. Slay your enemies in cold messy blood. Speak wisdom without exclusionary lingo. Just put it out there and insult people directly rather than insult people from above by being subtle and wry: "Poor fellow, he doesn't even understand that I've made a public fool of him." Said with sly sideways glances and smirks.

You know, it is strange to me that this gets my ire up (oops, used ire, but I'm not sure I used it right, so that's OK). I have a pretty satisfying life. I usually can keep dramatic entanglements at a distance. I can usually see through people propping themselves up and more often it just amuses rather than provokes me. People compete, need to feel right, enjoy status and power if they have it. I understand that. I'm not always angry. I don't feel put upon or mistreated. I brush off those that try. I'm not big into hero worship. I'm impressed by real achievement but I decide what that is and I'm not intimidated or made inferior by it. And yet I come here, I read, I see the kinds of artistic standards people have or the social organizations they want to impose and it just makes me want to clean house with a flamethrower.

I doubt I'm going to give in so what I really need to do is get this hook out of my mouth.

Lou (doing his best Asian movie character): "Heaven and Earth are not aligned. All is chaos. I must retire to Wah Mountain and seek sanctuary away from the mundane world of court intrigue and martial arts. Although James Horner and Media Ventures ravage the land, the people are taxed, the bad sleep well, I must turn away to cultivate enlightenment. Ah, I hear the sounds of Bernard Herrmann on the wind, this must be the path....."

If nothing else people, I hope at least you find me amusing.

NP: As You Like It (William Walton)

Lou said, “I hope you find me amusing.” Yep, I do and insightful. While in
terms of debate etiquette, I’m far more aligned with MWRuger’s philosophy, but
I never skip a Goldberg lesson, insight, or even ranting, gnashing diatribe.

And look how significantly tonight’s postings have increased my vocabulary.
“Termagant” and “Superprick.” Will definitely try those terms out on a few
colleagues tomorrow.

NP Firelight

My guess is that composers would beam with rosy pride if they were to behold such seething despisers and righteous defenders battling it out on their behalf.

I am sorry you feel that way and that you find my manner offensive, but it is a direct response to your own style. The more confrontational and “in your face” you become the more likely I am to distance my self from your emotional responses. As I intended no insult, I am sorry that you took it that way. If I had wanted to insult you, it would be more direct and as “Street” as you care to have it.

I am about as far from an elitist as you could imagine, despite what you believe. All I advocate is respect for other people opinions. In fact, I find far it more condescending informing everyone what his or her musical taste should be than using an obscure word now and then. You don’t know me, and you never will, so your opinion of me is without value or merit.

You know, the funny thing is that we are probably more closely aligned in our tastes than can be determined from these postings. From other postings you have made, I am pretty sure that our tastes are more alike than not. Horner and Zimmer are not personal favorites of mine, but I don’t feel the need to brand everyone who disagrees as some kind of idiot.

I enjoy music from many different composers and try to judge each work on it own merits, not the composer’s reputation, what others may think of that composer, how good the film is or any other factor beside my own personal reaction to the music. All I advocate is that others have the same opportunity free of the fear that they will be called fools by fellow film score fans that have different tastes and opinions.

I could just live and let live when it comes to other people. Most people do as they please regardless of me anyhow and that's the way it should be.

I respect that people have tastes and opinions, but, it's true, I don't always respect the content of those opinions.

I realize that opinions form from a person's emotional responses, experiences, thoughts, etc., that they are a mixture of the factual and the personal. I have my own opinions and I respect those, but I don't extrapolate that to include everybody else's opinions. I can be "xenophobic" about them.

"Well, if you don't respect my place in the universe, why should I respect yours?" My answer is always, you don't have to, I don't expect you to.

The golden rule: Do unto others. OK, no one likes to be called a jerk for what they believe. And yet, I think there ARE fools and jerks out there (and I don't exclude myself either). Just because you're human doesn't mean it's all hunky-dory. We may have unalienable rights (which we have to fight to keep anyway), but past that everything has to be earned.

Howard Hawks was asked why his films were so popular and he said: "If I like a joke, I figure other people will find it funny. If I think a girl's pretty, I figure other people will think so too."

And that's how I see it as well. If I don't like Horner, I understand that other people CAN like him but I don't see HOW they can. I should let it go, but often I feel like being my dentist or doctor trying to keep people up to my idea of what's healthy through DI tactics.

When I play a piece of music, that's the first consideration. Do I enjoy it. Who the composer is, comparisons with his whole other work, whether the composer is a nice guy or not don't come into it. Do I like it or not, that's what really counts.

Still, music is a personal expression of someone, and while there can be marked differences between art and artist, one can mostly but not entirely divorce who an artist is from his output.

I write these posts. You agree or disagree with the content, but you also know something about me personally through the writing, that I'm an SOB. I listen to Horner, and I know or atleast guess from the music that he's a fake. And so, yes, I do get down on HIM and not just the music. And, yes, I get down on his followers too. I narrow-mindedly disrespect them for being narrow-minded, for not seeing what I see as obvious from my point of view. And my way of trying to "convince" people blends with my frustration that I even have to explain what is "obvious" to them so I get mad.

Is it condescending and holier-than-thou? Probably. Am I being eltitst myself, since after all I'm "looking down" on people the way I resent snobs doing it to me? Hmmm. Well I do sleep around on my wife while forbidding her to so much as glance at another man so you could say I have a double standard going. [Actually, I'm not married. No big surprise I'm sure.] I don't set out to shrivel people (though I realize I was insulting you directly MWR), but I don't consider this a big sing along either.

This is a war over tastes and ideas about what film music should be, and there are gonna be some casualties. I put it out and someone returns fire--Bang: "He's a child." You put it out and I shoot back--Bang: "You're a sheep."

Then "peacekeepers" show up to push their weight around to try and return order to everything, because if the people are unruly the system won't produce what they themselves get out of it.

This isn't potty training at home where you can defecate and either way Mom smiles at you for being a good boy. In the world outside, if you put out crap, usually someone's gonna tell you it smells.

Look at politics, often the biggest fights are between factions of people on the same side. Fighting isn't peace but it reflects that there are conflicts that people want to solve even if it takes violence. And, like it or not, violence does solve conflict, and quite satisfyingly for the winners (unless the victory is Phyrric).

People have been fighting forever and actually we love it. We all go to movies or watch sports to see conflicts resolved through fight. Dramatic conflict and resolution is a large part of the film music we all listen to. And, if it wasn't there, it would all become the boring classical music we don't listen to as much.

You tell me to respect, not condescend, let people talk without holding them accountable to what they say, to "suffer fools lightly," or see no one's opinion as foolish to begin with. Don't you know by now?---Dems fightin' words.

At least I know exactly where I stand with you.

By your own words, you are an elitist, rude, hypocritical, (this is based on your statement on double standards), condescending, holier-than-thou, SOB who doesn’t expect respect or offer it to others.

Your opinions are expressed in service to the obvious truths that you observe with the goal of dissuading others of the lamentable habit of liking music you think is the work of hacks and fakes.