Kolya on 14/10/2007 at 19:14
Quote Posted by fett
two names immediately come to mind: Karl Marx and Jim Jones.
Vietnam, Bay of Pigs, Challenger, Columbia, Enron, Iraq.
I don't know Jim Jones but Marx is not a good example imo. The small and disparate group of communists he was part of lacks all the necessary conditions for groupthink.
charlestheoaf on 14/10/2007 at 19:34
Quote Posted by fett
The reason I spouted off is because when someone uses the term 'group-think' as a positive social concept, two names immediately come to mind: Karl Marx and Jim Jones.
And George Orwell
fett on 14/10/2007 at 19:47
Quote Posted by Kolya
Vietnam, Bay of Pigs, Challenger, Columbia, Enron, Iraq.
I don't know Jim Jones but Marx is not a good example imo. The small and disparate group of communists he was part of lacks all the necessary conditions for groupthink.
True dat. But I'm speaking more about the philosophical idealism than the failure/success.
Trappin on 14/10/2007 at 22:11
That's the entire point Zyme - they *didn't* have sarcasm or irony back then.
Who the heck taught you that nonsense? Gee lemme guess.. a "former" counter culture hippy with a $1.5m 401K plan and a PHD plaque from Berkeley? So society of the 30's 40's 50's was one big cardboard cutout? Culture was a monolithic one-size-fits-all jumpsuit? Real honest-to-goodness cultural experiences didn't occur until some long forgotten Andy Warhol type pre-goth post-modern neo-traditionalist beatnik said so?
Did smiling rural idiots just wandered around Mayberry RFD with a fishing pole and a copy of King James Bible or were they all somnambulised suburbanite nabobs happily mowing the lawn and trimming the grass around the soviet-era backyard bomb shelter?
Amazing how the counter culture bullshitters have boiled down the culture of multiple generations into a nice neat little package ... an intellectual fast food package cooked up for mental consumption at the local universities.
OMG - what an effin load of horse splatter.
The Church of Latter Day Saints is two blocks down
Nice touch of religious bigotry. Does this pass as intellectual thought on campus or is it part of the daily Two Minutes Hate mantra ?
fett on 14/10/2007 at 23:08
Quote Posted by Trappin
That's the entire point Zyme - they *didn't* have sarcasm or irony back then.Who the heck taught you that nonsense? Gee lemme guess.. a "former" counter culture hippy with a $1.5m 401K plan and a PHD plaque from Berkeley? So society of the 30's 40's 50's was one big cardboard cutout? Culture was a monolithic one-size-fits-all jumpsuit? Real honest-to-goodness cultural experiences didn't occur until some long forgotten Andy Warhol type pre-goth post-modern neo-traditionalist beatnik said so?
Did smiling rural idiots just wandered around Mayberry RFD with a fishing pole and a copy of King James Bible or were they all somnambulised suburbanite nabobs happily mowing the lawn and trimming the grass around the soviet-era backyard bomb shelter?
Amazing how the counter culture bullshitters have boiled down the culture of multiple generations into a nice neat little package ... an intellectual fast food package cooked up for mental consumption at the local universities.
OMG - what an effin load of horse splatter.p
No one 'taught' me that, it's something I've personally observed as a public speaker for the last 15 years. The generation of the 50's simply either do not appreciate or do not 'get' sarcastic, ironic humor and commentary *as a general rule*. I thought it was assumed that there are exceptions to that. And my comment was more in reference to media consumption of that era, not individuals. If you disagree, feel free to list for us popular books, radio shows, or movies of that era that celebrated irony and pessimism ala Seinfeld or Kevin Smith.
And you've missed the point entirely anyway. Noting the absence of irony in the cultural language of a generation, doesn't mean at all that their culture was boring, stupid, cardboar cutout, or any of those big (but mighty impressive) words you used.
The whole point was that as a culture, the predominating form of media seems oriented toward 'group think' and a morally sanitized society. That wasn't the reality for every individual of that culture, but it was certainly an accurate representation of the mentality of much of that generation - and if you don't believe it, do a few passes through a retirement home and ask them what's wrong with the world today.
Quote Posted by Trappin
Nice touch of religious bigotry. Does this pass as intellectual thought on campus or is it part of the daily Two Minutes Hate mantra ?
You haven't been here long huh? The fact that
I even made that statement is ironic in and of itself. If you think group-think is the cure for sub-intellectual communication, you can fuck right the hell off because that's the mentality that threatens, oh I don't know - every damn thing the human race has been striving to break away from since the Renaissance. There's a balance and group-think ain't it.
Rug Burn Junky on 14/10/2007 at 23:46
Is Trappin's magic underwear chafing him?
Papy on 14/10/2007 at 23:57
Quote Posted by fett
No one 'taught' me that, it's something I've personally observed as a public speaker for the last 15 years. The generation of the 50's simply either do not appreciate or do not 'get' sarcastic, ironic humor and commentary *as a general rule*.
Is it because of their generation or simply because of their age ? When I hear the average teen speaking, I can't help but think : what an idiot. But the truth is I was pretty much one of those idiots myself when I was a kid. The truth is my values and what I appreciate changed with me getting older. I am really not like I was in the 80s.
There's also something that I must admit. I do appreciate irony and sarcasm, to me it's a sign of intelligence, but only when it comes from someone my age or older. When a kid is using sarcasm, I think he's just a pretentious smartass who deserve to be smacked.
Back to 50's media, here's something that may seems unrelated... The first time I took a plane was in 76. At this time, it was still a big deal. We prepared, we dressed well, and we were excited. Now, a plane is no more exciting than a bus or a cab (in fact, I've probably taken more planes than cabs). We buy our ticket on a website, we put some clothes in a luggage, we go to the airport, and... that's it.
TV, movies and, to a lesser extent, radio was still a big deal in the 50s. Don't you think it's normal that people kind of acted weird ?
Vivian on 15/10/2007 at 00:00
Spike Milligan, fucks sake.
Oh yeah, exceptions.
Kolya on 15/10/2007 at 00:27
You know for the few 60+ year olds I have spoken with most of our culture is quite incomprehensible. They seem to be always on the lookout, because from their point of view we younger generations are a bunch of lying scumbags. Not any young person in particular but as a general rule. And that ain't because we're clever enough to use and detect irony and sarcasm, they use it themselves among their kin, but because a lot of outright and obvious lying is acceptable today, that would never have been allowed that openly in their time. I mean specifically public communication: ads, politics, newspapers, speeches, etc.
Not that it didn't happen in their time, but it was more of a taboo with higher sanctions. Maybe because much of the lying was never found out. The controls of politics and economy through media weren't that evolved.
On the other hand I've read a bit of literature from the 1920s lately, like F. Scott Fitzgerald and the writings of Louise Brooks and they were obviously quite capable of conveying a truth in deliberate euphemisms or irony or (much rarer) sarcasm.
So I think generally for media communication, (excluding books) you are right, fett. But obviously there is a whole row of exceptions to that and I guess it just came off a bit too oversimplified for Trappin.
fett on 15/10/2007 at 01:23
Quote Posted by Papy
Is it because of their generation or simply because of their age ?
I think it's specifically that generation (though there may be former generations but I can't speak on that). You're dealing with people raised largely in an agricultural/industrial lifestyle by parents who had lived through the Great Depression. They themselves dealt with the nation changing drama of Pearl Harbor, Normandy, and Hiroshima. I've been very close to several elderly people of that generation and while they are extremely good natured, they are mostly no-bullshit, straight-shooter types that don't respect someone who can't say something straight out. Irony and sarcasm is the opposite of that mindset and they view it as cowardice, or just stupidity mostly, unless it's in the obvious context of humor, and even then they usually don't appreciate it. They have their own sense of humor - you've never laughed as hard as you will listening to a few 70 year olds trade insults with each other. Their sense of humor is more simple and sophisticated, but it's all the way down at the opposite end of the spectrum from your average modern sitcom or stand-up comic in terms of irony, understatement, and cynicism.
