K.I.S.S.
Pt
Both of my parents were pro musicians and loved to jam.
I went to Catholic schools where I was taught music from day one.
Every student had to learn to play some sort of instrument.
Plus I sang in the choir starting in first grade.
I'm talking about back in the 50's.
Music was part your education in those days.
Times have changed.
Most schools no longer offer a mandatory music program.
If someone wants to learn music they are on their own.
When I was a kid most 7 year olds knew the major scale and could read
it in standard notation.
What was just part of life in those days is now by choice and most
people don't make that choice until they are teenagers or older.
And now you have to pay for music lessons.
Today many players never had a lesson.
They learn from the internet.
One of the first things I learned was the harmonized scale of triads
in a major key.
It seems that today the things that were just a part of growing up in
the 50's are complex music theory.
For me playing music was easy.
I learned at the same time I learned to add, subtract and spell Cat.
You guys have a much rougher road ahead of you if you want to learn
and play music.
Keep it simple and you will go a long way.
But hard things are simple if you know how to do them.
I see threads in this group that deal with modes, melodic/harmonic
scales etc.
Don't worry about that stuff.
Learn the basics and just play your guitar as often as possible and
with as many other people as possible.
And if you can...take lessons.
Most importantly.....
Have fun and....
Tap Your Foot!!!
Pt
Derek
band in the world".
Pt
> Rats! I thought this was going to be a post about KISS, "the hottest
> band in the world".
Did they puke real blood?
Pt
oasysco
No, but they made me puke :)-
Greg
>
> Pt
no66y©
"Pt" wrote in message
> Music was part your education in those days.
> Times have changed.
I think the lessons in school are aimed at getting a job.
So you learn English, maths, computers etc.
Music and other arts are not "needed" to get a job.
Maybe people who come up with the modern curricula.
should take time out to watch "The Dead Poets Society" or at least this part
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YvmV0ogAQQ
The important quote being (the word "poetry" of course can be substituted
with the word "music", or "art" etc):
"We don't read and write poetry because it's cute. We read and write poetry
because we are members of the human race.
And the human race is filled with passion.
Medicine, law, business, engineering, these are all noble pursuits, and
necessary to sustain life.
But poetry, beauty, romance, love, these are what we stay alive for.
To quote from Whitman: "O me, o life of the questions of these recurring,
of the endless trains of the faithless, of cities filled with the foolish.
What good amid these, o me, o life?
Answer: that you are here. That life exists, and identity.
That the powerful play goes on, and you may contribute a verse.
That the powerful play goes on and you may contribute a verse."
--
No66y©
Those who find they're touched by madness
Sit down next to me.
Virtual Preserve are here!
www.soundclick.com/bands/virtualpreserve
Reply to address is a spam trap.
Use no66y [at] breathe [dot] com
Les Cargill
> "Pt" wrote in message
>
>>Music was part your education in those days.
>>Times have changed.
>
>
> I think the lessons in school are aimed at getting a job.
> So you learn English, maths, computers etc.
>
> Music and other arts are not "needed" to get a job.
>
Music teaches people harmony/ratios, balance, form
and "what happens next." Clearly, these skills are
a liability in the workplace.
> Maybe people who come up with the modern curricula.
> should take time out to watch "The Dead Poets Society" or at least this part
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YvmV0ogAQQ
>
> The important quote being (the word "poetry" of course can be substituted
> with the word "music", or "art" etc):
>
> "We don't read and write poetry because it's cute. We read and write poetry
> because we are members of the human race.
> And the human race is filled with passion.
> Medicine, law, business, engineering, these are all noble pursuits, and
> necessary to sustain life.
To an extent. But they all are, to a *greater* extent, the
sort of activities which have some sort of "greasy pole
climbing contest" to see who gets to do them.
> But poetry, beauty, romance, love, these are what we stay alive for.
> To quote from Whitman: "O me, o life of the questions of these recurring,
> of the endless trains of the faithless, of cities filled with the foolish.
> What good amid these, o me, o life?
> Answer: that you are here. That life exists, and identity.
> That the powerful play goes on, and you may contribute a verse.
> That the powerful play goes on and you may contribute a verse."
>
>
>
In the 1960s, a Dumbness Festival started. It's still going on. It
will likely never be curtailed. So we are all better off embracing
the Dumbness and working within it.
Think about it. In the 1940s, Fun was dancing to Benny Goodman or
possibly Bob Wills, possibly consuming alcohol.
In the '60s, it was dancing in the mud to Hendrix and consuming LSD.
How is that *possibly* an improvement? I have nothing against
mud or Hendrix, but the combo seems... less fun than Goodman
and a little hooch on dry land.
When inexplicable things like this happen, you know there
has to be a pretty dern good reason. I hereby hypothesize
that the reason is that Hendrix in the mud us far dumber
than Bob Wills on hardwood.
Dumbess is, by one view of things, more egalitarian. So it's
all in the service of brotherhood, right? So in 20 years...
people willl be swilling Very Advanced Hallucinogenics and
going to see people play back Acid-looped soundtracks from
video games on an iPodXIX while they do interpretive dance.
And these people better stay off my damn lawn.
--
Les Cargill
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Les Cargill <lcar...@cfl.rr.com>
> Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com
> Reply-To: uh...@nope.com
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:54:30 -0500
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
>
> Dumbness is, by one view of things, more egalitarian. So it's
> all in the service of brotherhood, right? So in 20 years...
> people willl be swilling Very Advanced Hallucinogenics and
> going to see people play back Acid-looped soundtracks from
> video games on an iPodXIX while they do interpretive dance.
not that I'm buying your entire shpeel (even though I do recognize and morn
the greater "devo" pattern that's been underway and emerging undeniably),
but the bit you describe above is already here, it's already happened ;-)
Our once culture _is_ nearly dead it seems. What the hell though, we won't
need it much longer anyway, the ice-caps are melting you know. Maybe it is
time to start packing our bags. ;-)
If it's not one thing it's the next, from impending nuclear-war inhalation
to impending environmental collapse, or the certainty of continuing
global-Jehad-terrorism. The end seems always imminent. Only thing is, it
might actually be true this time.
I dig it all -- cept _Opera_ sopranos! ;-) Now _there's_ a scourge, an
affront, an insult! Yuk.
Roger
Lumpy
> Music teaches people harmony/ratios, balance, form
> and "what happens next." Clearly, these skills are
> a liability in the workplace.
Music also teaches people, uh, music. Kids in school
could certainly grow up to be musicians just like
they could grow up to be mathematicians or
historians or English literaturians.
Lumpy
--
You were the Tidy Bowl Guy?
Yes. I'm cleaning your bathroom bowl.
www.lumpyvoice.org
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: "Roger E. Blumberg" <rblu...@jps.net>
> Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:23:51 GMT
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
Opera and _Rap_ of course (but that goes without saying ;') talk about
_devo_. "Hip-hop culture", now there's an oxymoron! -- though I do like
Nelly and few others (without reserve or qualification), I must admit. But
still, Jeeze already, time to move on kids ;-)
Roger
Stephen Calder
> Think about it. In the 1940s, Fun was dancing to Benny Goodman or
> possibly Bob Wills, possibly consuming alcohol.
>
> In the '60s, it was dancing in the mud to Hendrix and consuming LSD.
>
> How is that *possibly* an improvement? I have nothing against
> mud or Hendrix, but the combo seems... less fun than Goodman
> and a little hooch on dry land.
>
> When inexplicable things like this happen, you know there
> has to be a pretty dern good reason. I hereby hypothesize
> that the reason is that Hendrix in the mud us far dumber
> than Bob Wills on hardwood.
>
Clearly you've never taken acid.
--
Stephen
Ballina, Australia
Stephen Calder
>
> If it's not one thing it's the next, from impending nuclear-war inhalation
> to impending environmental collapse, or the certainty of continuing
> global-Jehad-terrorism. The end seems always imminent. Only thing is, it
> might actually be true this time.
That's what they want you to think. Governments know a scared populace
is more docile.
--
Stephen
Ballina, Australia
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Stephen Calder <cal...@in.com.au>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 11:41:42 +1100
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
Can you even get the real thing today? I get the sense that everything is
cut with all kinds of other garbage these days. I'd have a hard time
trusting it. I heard some kid on TV talking about the hard and
excruciatingly severe "crash" from X, and I said to myself "what the hell
are they selling as Ecstasy these days?! Surely not the stuff (the real
thing) that was around in the early 80's. I didn't compute, her comments.
Roger
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Stephen Calder <cal...@in.com.au>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 11:45:29 +1100
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
uninformed and ignorant works just as well, better in fact.
Roger
SteveG
> Les Cargill wrote:
>
>> Music teaches people harmony/ratios, balance, form
>> and "what happens next." Clearly, these skills are
>> a liability in the workplace.
>
> Music also teaches people, uh, music. Kids in school
> could certainly grow up to be musicians just like
> they could grow up to be mathematicians or
> historians or English literaturians.
>
>
> Lumpy
Back in the 70's when I were a lad in school, my music lessons consisted
of "Mozart was born xxxx and died xxxxx and wrote xxxx (Left no
impression as you can see). It was another history lesson. We learned
stave notes and time values, but just as theory which was mindnumbingly
boring. Violin lessons were available at a cost, but only if you had
first learned recorder... BORING!!!! Guitars were considered tools of satan.
Things have changed now, my stepsons were coming home with demo's they
had laid down in the schools studio, using the schools gear. Guess I was
born too soon :(
Stephen Calder
>
>> From: Stephen Calder <cal...@in.com.au>
>> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
>> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 11:41:42 +1100
>> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
>>
>> Les Cargill wrote:
>>
>>> Think about it. In the 1940s, Fun was dancing to Benny Goodman or
>>> possibly Bob Wills, possibly consuming alcohol.
>>>
>>> In the '60s, it was dancing in the mud to Hendrix and consuming LSD.
>>>
>>> How is that *possibly* an improvement? I have nothing against
>>> mud or Hendrix, but the combo seems... less fun than Goodman
>>> and a little hooch on dry land.
>>>
>>> When inexplicable things like this happen, you know there
>>> has to be a pretty dern good reason. I hereby hypothesize
>>> that the reason is that Hendrix in the mud us far dumber
>>> than Bob Wills on hardwood.
>
>
>> Clearly you've never taken acid.
>
>
> Can you even get the real thing today?
Haven't tried for years but I haven't seen any either.
I get the sense that everything is
> cut with all kinds of other garbage these days. I'd have a hard time
> trusting it.
In the past I never tried anything that hadn't been tried by a trusted
friend first.
I heard some kid on TV talking about the hard and
> excruciatingly severe "crash" from X, and I said to myself "what the hell
> are they selling as Ecstasy these days?! Surely not the stuff (the real
> thing) that was around in the early 80's. I didn't compute, her comments.
I never did try ecstasy.
As you say, probably too late now.
--
Stephen
Ballina, Australia
Stephen Calder
That's why we have television. Gives the illusion that you know what's
going on and scares you shitless. Best of both worlds from the
controllers' point of view. Sells stuff too.
--
Stephen
Ballina, Australia
M.Butzin
"Stephen Calder" <cal...@in.com.au> wrote in message
news:45cd...@news.eftel.com.au...
Mescaline:-))) I like.....Take a trip and never leave the farm!
>
>
> --
> Stephen
> Ballina, Australia
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Stephen Calder <cal...@in.com.au>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 12:33:00 +1100
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
>
> Roger E. Blumberg wrote:
>>
>>> From: Stephen Calder <cal...@in.com.au>
>>> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
>>> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 11:45:29 +1100
>>> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
>>>
>>> Roger E. Blumberg wrote:
>>>
>>>> If it's not one thing it's the next, from impending nuclear-war inhalation
>>>> to impending environmental collapse, or the certainty of continuing
>>>> global-Jehad-terrorism. The end seems always imminent. Only thing is, it
>>>> might actually be true this time.
>>> That's what they want you to think. Governments know a scared populace
>>> is more docile.
>>
>>
>> uninformed and ignorant works just as well, better in fact.
>>
>> Roger
>>
>
> That's why we have television. Gives the illusion that you know what's
> going on and scares you shitless. Best of both worlds from the
> controllers' point of view. Sells stuff too.
>
Ok, so we have "the illusion" of "the truth", and that scares the hell out
of us. And then we have the clear truth in fact, and that _also_ scares the
hell out of us!
So how do we carry on, without fear then? Seems to me we could only be
"fearless" if we conclude that we don't "know" _anything_, and that even if
we did know we'd be "ok" with it. That's some very weird programming.
How do you live without fear? Do you live without fear? Will that work? Can
that work? At this stage in the game? The consequences, the pain, is what we
fear. How do you not fear pain? It's hard-wired neurobiology and
neurochemistry, isn't it? Feeling, feelings. You can't have one without the
other, pleasure/pain. Maybe cyborg-ness _is_ the answer. That's it! The
Borg! They've got it right ;-) Heck, I'd submit to Ms. Nine's will any day,
chances are. What's boy to do, resist _that_? ;-) What-are-ya-nuts?!
Roger
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: "M.Butzin" <mfbu...@netscape.net>
> Organization: AT&T http://yahoo.sbc.com
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 20:06:12 -0600
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
no, Shrooms, me want shrooms! ;-) [that's actually what real X reminded me
most of]. Is it true they grow in cow-pies? or is that just folk-lore, or am
I miss-matchin my facts? ;-) City-folk wanna know, Pa-Butzin!
Roger
RPM1
"Les Cargill" <lcar...@cfl.rr.com> wrote in
> In the 1960s, a Dumbness Festival started. It's still going on. It
> will likely never be curtailed. So we are all better off embracing
> the Dumbness and working within it.
>
> Think about it. In the 1940s, Fun was dancing to Benny Goodman or
> possibly Bob Wills, possibly consuming alcohol.
>
> In the '60s, it was dancing in the mud to Hendrix and consuming LSD.
>
> How is that *possibly* an improvement? I have nothing against
> mud or Hendrix, but the combo seems... less fun than Goodman
> and a little hooch on dry land.
>
In my mind, Hendrix is a continuation of Goodman. They both took the
general public's taste to a new place. They are linked by the freedom they
found in music. Birds of different feathers to be sure, but both were
beautilful flyers.
Patrick
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: "Roger E. Blumberg" <rblu...@jps.net>
> Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 02:11:07 GMT
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
oops, that was Mistress-Seven (of Nine). Hope she's as forgiving as she is
temptating.
Roger
M.Butzin
"Roger E. Blumberg" <rblu...@jps.net> wrote in message
news:C1F26CB2.4F621%rblu...@jps.net...
the Air Force had me at the time.....to the main base, (Eglin AFB). That
trip took me past fields of cattle with piles of cow poop, my room mate said
look at those shrooms growing in them patties. Now they only grow when the
temp and moisture is jeeest right. About 10:30 AM is when they start dying,
so we stopped and each had a small trash bag full of them. Then the farmer
pulls up and thought we was "cattle rustlers" LOL(with plastic trash bags)
he walks out to us and said you boys want to get shot? I said for what?
ain't you here to steal my cows? NOPE, so he asks us exactly we were doing
and I explained how the shrooms were going on a "pizza" and he let us go,
just before the cops showed. We took them shrooms home and made "Magic Tea"
I boiled down the batch and mixed it with Lipton Iced Tea, MAN what a trip!
Those shrooms have a ring around the stem kinda purplish in color, tall and
skinny. It's a FACT in da pattie on top........
Got the car back, the wife is now deer hunter type she's out looking for her
500.00 deductible and a deer with a bald ass............
MB
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: "M.Butzin" <mfbu...@netscape.net>
> Organization: AT&T http://yahoo.sbc.com
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 20:49:21 -0600
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
he-he '-)
got a time-table now too, thanks. Guess the early-boy gets the shrooms!
Pizza-fixins-Wrangler! Watch out for the Cow-pie police!
> Got the car back, the wife is now deer hunter type she's out looking for her
> 500.00 deductible and a deer with a bald ass............
>
> MB
oh ya, forgot about that. You were lucky. (bout time!) ;-)
Roger
Les Cargill
>
>>From: Les Cargill <lcar...@cfl.rr.com>
>>Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com
>>Reply-To: uh...@nope.com
>>Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
>>Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:54:30 -0500
>>Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
>>
>
>
>>Dumbness is, by one view of things, more egalitarian. So it's
>>all in the service of brotherhood, right? So in 20 years...
>>people willl be swilling Very Advanced Hallucinogenics and
>>going to see people play back Acid-looped soundtracks from
>>video games on an iPodXIX while they do interpretive dance.
>
>
> not that I'm buying your entire shpeel (even though I do recognize and morn
> the greater "devo" pattern that's been underway and emerging undeniably),
> but the bit you describe above is already here, it's already happened ;-)
>
Well, I'm being 1) hyperbolic and 2) cranky.
It's really easy to turn *off* most of the Dumbness. And some
of it is fun.
> Our once culture _is_ nearly dead it seems. What the hell though, we won't
> need it much longer anyway, the ice-caps are melting you know. Maybe it is
> time to start packing our bags. ;-)
>
No way. But it's going on forty years old, and people are
getting tired of it. Hell, it's a manifestation of stuff much older
than forty, but brevity and all...
> If it's not one thing it's the next, from impending nuclear-war inhalation
> to impending environmental collapse, or the certainty of continuing
> global-Jehad-terrorism. The end seems always imminent. Only thing is, it
> might actually be true this time.
>
> I dig it all -- cept _Opera_ sopranos! ;-) Now _there's_ a scourge, an
> affront, an insult! Yuk.
>
I have a DVD of Stravinsky's "The Nightingale" that has this soprano
with a really *soft*, non-armor-piercing delivery. And
there's that octopus-lady on "The Fifth Element" .
So we got that going for us.
> Roger
>
--
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
No, media channels know prurient garbage gets better ratings.
Oh, wait....
--
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
Have you ever read "The Hidden Persuaders"? The whole point is to
ratchet up your stress levels with the programming. That sets
you up for the release through the commercials.
And people get sort of addicted to the interplay of endorphins
through this process.
My point is that it is not as Orwellian as "we have controllers."
What we have is people who want to get to the golf course before
3:00 PM. They go with old tried and true because they will be more
immune to criticism should it not work.
But the Dumbness, that's a seperate thing.
--
Les Cargill
--
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
There exist people who, through accident ( generally stroke) no longer
have fear. The limbic system is completely disconnected from the ...
"higher centers."
I guarantee you - these are some confused people. Fear isn't quite
the enemy of logic it is presented to be.
--
Les Cargill
M.Butzin
yup, before 11:00 AM, the sun gets too hot and burns them up after that, the
best day is when it is foggy early and about an hour before the fog burns
completly off is "Majic Time" Natures Own.
Les Cargill
> Les Cargill wrote:
>
>
>>Music teaches people harmony/ratios, balance, form
>>and "what happens next." Clearly, these skills are
>>a liability in the workplace.
>
>
> Music also teaches people, uh, music. Kids in school
> could certainly grow up to be musicians just like
> they could grow up to be mathematicians or
> historians or English literaturians.
>
>
> Lumpy
Why, indeed they could. But I think that any reasonable
person would look with a jaundiced eye towards what it
might do for those who do not. Surely the number
of those who will not become pros outweighs the
number who do.
The is the sort of Trojan horsing we always do for the arts.
We have to justify it in terms of what it will do for
even the nonspecialist. Because the specialist will
always find a way.
After all, we're arguing for disbursement of public funds
towards this.
--
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
Clearly.
--
Les Cargill
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: "M.Butzin" <mfbu...@netscape.net>
> Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 03:21:11 GMT
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
Before fog-rise. Yes-SIR!
Salute!
Roger
Les Cargill
> "Les Cargill" <lcar...@cfl.rr.com> wrote in
>
>
>>In the 1960s, a Dumbness Festival started. It's still going on. It
>>will likely never be curtailed. So we are all better off embracing
>>the Dumbness and working within it.
>>
>>Think about it. In the 1940s, Fun was dancing to Benny Goodman or
>>possibly Bob Wills, possibly consuming alcohol.
>>
>>In the '60s, it was dancing in the mud to Hendrix and consuming LSD.
>>
>>How is that *possibly* an improvement? I have nothing against
>>mud or Hendrix, but the combo seems... less fun than Goodman
>>and a little hooch on dry land.
>>
>
>
> In my mind, Hendrix is a continuation of Goodman.
Um, no. I am very, very sorry to inform you of this, but no.
Benny Goodman was a total control freak with an ear. He ground
it out for decades. He beat his people to *death* to
get that sound. He was not nice about it. It was war.
Benny Goodman represents a will that Hendrix never exhibited.
*Zappa* was in the Benny Goodman tradition.
Now, if you'd said "a continuation of Bob Wills", thn I would be forced
to agree with you.
> They both took the
> general public's taste to a new place. They are linked by the freedom they
> found in music. Birds of different feathers to be sure, but both were
> beautilful flyers.
>
> Patrick
>
>
And that is most cetrainly true. But Hendrix in front of the
Woodstock audience is *far* too reminicsent of pigs for the
phrase "pearls before swine" to not resonate.
Again, it is not any given element that is the point; it is
the placement of those elements within a frame that is the point.
--
les Cargill
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Les Cargill <lcar...@cfl.rr.com>
> Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com
> Reply-To: uh...@nope.com
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 22:19:28 -0500
I bet they are ... out of body. Wierd.
Roger
Les Cargill
I have only seen it on film, but yes. They're very disconected.
Strange and wondrous is the mind.
--
Les Cargill
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Les Cargill <lcar...@cfl.rr.com>
> Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com
> Reply-To: uh...@nope.com
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 22:11:05 -0500
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
> I have a DVD of Stravinsky's "The Nightingale" that has this soprano
> with a really *soft*, non-armor-piercing delivery. And
> there's that octopus-lady on "The Fifth Element" .
>
> So we got that going for us.
>
ya, they do exist, and it is nice to hear in those rare cases.
Top-notch boy's-choirs are hard to beat, for angelic sopranos.
"armor-piercing" -- I'll have to remember that one ;-)
I think I'd have to wear ear-plugs to play a wire-strung violin that close
to my ears! Give me gut, sweet gut! Soprano and obnoxious needn't be
synonymous, but they so often are, it seems.
Roger
Stephen Calder
You're restricting truth to its narrowest sense. The truth about
anything in the world is mere information; somehow when operating in the
world we learn a way that works for us, more or less, of
discriminating between good and bad information. Not always successfully.
Okay, now we have to get into some philosophy because you hit the nail
on the head as to what the real "problem" is: fear. That's it.
Ultimately, the fear of being separate from something we love, and fear
that it will punish us for separating ourselves.
Truth at the highest level, the level "above" the apparent reality of
the world, cannot be scary because it is an eternal singularity with
beauty, joy, love, expansion, abundance and peace.
>
> So how do we carry on, without fear then?
Excellent question with no one answer that will work for everyone. You
have to find your own, sorry. I know what worked for me to get to a
place where I am almost always peaceful, but it involved years of study
and practise and for most people that seems to be pretty much what it
takes. But when realisation happens it happens fairly swiftly,
spontaneously, and in a sense the preparation was irrelevant. It just
happens when it happens. and even then there's still more to learn in
the playground.
Seems to me we could only be
> "fearless" if we conclude that we don't "know" _anything_, and that even if
> we did know we'd be "ok" with it. That's some very weird programming.
Okay, my path brought me to the recognition that knowing anything about
what seems to be going on is perhaps useful for survival, but is in fact
false knowledge compared to knowledge of That which everyone wants. We
either have It or we yearn for It. Some look for It in fame, fortune,
power or possessions, but these only work temporarily because we are
still in time. It is outside time, in eternity.
So if I discover that true knowledge, the knowledge of what I am, has
nothing to do with the world, except in that the world is a school
playground where we learn what we need to learn, then I learn in the
playground that the playground isn't It. It is something within me,
something I already am or am part of, depending on how you want to see
it. And in this I'm no different from you. My decision to have peace no
matter what it took was the key.
>
> How do you live without fear? Do you live without fear?
Most of the time.
Will that work? Can
> that work?
I'm becoming addicted to it.
At this stage in the game?
To me the game (the world or physical universe) is something much more
plastic than most people believe. Changing your beliefs about it, and
therefore your reactions too it, brings about an internal shift so that
the world shows up differently. The decisions you then make are made
without deciding; the only important decision, that for peace, already
having been made. Every decision depends on that.
The consequences, the pain, is what we
> fear. How do you not fear pain?
Are you in pain right now? The fear of pain is fear about something in
the future, and since we can't foresee the future (except in a very
limited way) the fear is irrational. All fear is, in fact, although the
alarm you feel that keeps you from stepping onto a dangerous road is
necessary for survival; the question is: survival of what? Which comes
down to the essence of your true identity, which can be confronting
because it is not the identity you are used to employing to get along in
the world. That identity tends to jack up when you discover it's been
misleading you, or if you come along with the idea of unity, not as an
alternative to separateness, but as the truth, as distinct from the
illusion of separateness. We are one collective mind, whether we realise
it or not.
It's hard-wired neurobiology and
> neurochemistry, isn't it? Feeling, feelings.
Feelings seem to be something that happens to you as a result of outside
stimuli, but they're not. Your reactions to outside stimuli are a
conditioned response, and if you want to change your ability to respond
you have to undo the conditioning.
If you can change your belief about your feelings being hard wired you
could be more open to the possibility of change, and then the
possibility would become a potentiality in you and, with persistence, a
reality. You literally change the world when you change yourself,
because of the interconnectedness of all things.
You can't have one without the
> other, pleasure/pain.
Which is why the world cannot be a reflection of Reality. Reality could
only be perfectly fulfilled and joyous. But that reality is accessible
if you are willing to suspend belief in what you take for reality now.
Maybe cyborg-ness _is_ the answer. That's it! The
> Borg! They've got it right ;-)
I was thinking about this the other day. The Borg of course are very
scary enemies of humanity in the Star Trek stories, but they represent
an archetypal idea in the collective unconscious: the idea of unity, or
all creation in communication with itself eternally. The idea is given
scary connotations because it IS scary to those holding on to the idea
that world has something to offer that they don't want to give up, hence
the Borg. I know the world has nothing I want and nothing that will
last, so the idea of the end of time is not scary to me. In fact, bring
it on. But when it ends for me it doesn't mean it has to end for you.
You have to decide that for yourself, but everyone does decide for peace
eventually.
Heck, I'd submit to Ms. Nine's will any day,
> chances are. What's boy to do, resist _that_? ;-) What-are-ya-nuts?!
>
I quite like the Seven of Nine character and Jeri Ryan played it very
well. I didn't think she was as good in Boston Public, just as Terry
Farrell was much better in Deep Space Nine than in Becker.
All judgements and opinions, not to be taken as meaningful. Who cares?
--
Stephen
Ballina, Australia
M.Butzin
either or that "real tree" crap, the real camo stuff, out in Cali you may
get by with the "chocolate chip cookie" kind (desert storm) depending on
what the feilds look like. In Fla. I had the "tiger type" jungle
camo.....Good hunting
MB
>
Pt
Pt
M.Butzin
>
>
>> From: Les Cargill <lcar...@cfl.rr.com>
>> Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com
>> Reply-To: uh...@nope.com
>> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
>> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 22:11:05 -0500
>> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
>
>
>
>> I have a DVD of Stravinsky's "The Nightingale" that has this soprano
>> with a really *soft*, non-armor-piercing delivery. And
>> there's that octopus-lady on "The Fifth Element" .
>>
>> So we got that going for us.
>>
>
>
> ya, they do exist, and it is nice to hear in those rare cases.
> Top-notch boy's-choirs are hard to beat, for angelic sopranos.
PINK FLOYD~DARK SIDE OF THE MOON, say no more
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: "M.Butzin" <mfbu...@netscape.net>
> Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 04:36:25 GMT
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
Cali cow-pie camo. Check!
raymo
> You guys have a much rougher road ahead of you if you want to learn
> and play music.
With the Intraweb and all, I think it's easier for the kiddies to get
started.
Raymo.
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Stephen Calder <cal...@in.com.au>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 15:20:05 +1100
er, I though we were talking about _earthly_ "reality". You seem to be
talking about "The Lord God" or something, some kind of "heavenly truth" or
something. I'm not sure I'm on-board with the "beauty, joy, love, expansion,
abundance and peace" stuff. I believe the Universe (God) just doesn't care
one way or the other. If you "don't care" you have no worries, true enough,
but even that doesn't equate with beauty, joy, love, expansion, abundance
and peace. If you "don't care" those qualities you enumerate don't matter
"above", or/and the opposite conditions are just as present, they're just
"the fact" of it, all in the mix, with no judgements. In other words; "it's
all good" to God, I reckon. i.e. Nothing matters.
>> So how do we carry on, without fear then?
> Excellent question with no one answer that will work for everyone. You
> have to find your own, sorry. I know what worked for me to get to a
> place where I am almost always peaceful, but it involved years of study
> and practise and for most people that seems to be pretty much what it
> takes. But when realisation happens it happens fairly swiftly,
> spontaneously, and in a sense the preparation was irrelevant. It just
> happens when it happens. and even then there's still more to learn in
> the playground.
>> Seems to me we could only be
>> "fearless" if we conclude that we don't "know" _anything_, and that even if
>> we did know we'd be "ok" with it. That's some very weird programming.
> Okay, my path brought me to the recognition that knowing anything about
> what seems to be going on is perhaps useful for survival, but is in fact
> false knowledge compared to knowledge of That which everyone wants. We
> either have It or we yearn for It. Some look for It in fame, fortune,
> power or possessions, but these only work temporarily because we are
> still in time. It is outside time, in eternity.
"IT" is unattainable, nor maintainable, in reality, on earth, and in time.
So we don't have to worry about IT. But what about those of us who have
their feet on the ground, flesh and blood, in time. That's the point.
> So if I discover that true knowledge, the knowledge of what I am, has
> nothing to do with the world, except in that the world is a school
> playground where we learn what we need to learn, then I learn in the
> playground that the playground isn't It. It is something within me,
> something I already am or am part of, depending on how you want to see
> it. And in this I'm no different from you. My decision to have peace no
> matter what it took was the key.
Ya, so, we're all "star-dust", I know, and our ultimate destiny is to get
sucked into a big Black Hole. That's what we _are_ and where we're headed.
There is no "I", no consciousness, without our living brains in time. You
die, or get severely brain injured, and no "I" no mo.
>> How do you live without fear? Do you live without fear?
> Most of the time.
>> Will that work? Can that work?
> I'm becoming addicted to it.
careful. True addictions always have a downside.
>> At this stage in the game?
> To me the game (the world or physical universe) is something much more
> plastic than most people believe. Changing your beliefs about it, and
> therefore your reactions too it, brings about an internal shift so that
> the world shows up differently.
that's true enough.
> The decisions you then make are made
> without deciding; the only important decision, that for peace, already
> having been made. Every decision depends on that.
but here again you're operating from some state-of-mind I don't understand
-- one where you can just "roll with everything" unaffected. Captain Teflon.
>> The consequences, the pain, is what we fear. How do you not fear pain?
> Are you in pain right now? The fear of pain is fear about something in
> the future, and since we can't foresee the future (except in a very
> limited way) the fear is irrational. All fear is, in fact, although the
> alarm you feel that keeps you from stepping onto a dangerous road is
> necessary for survival; the question is: survival of what? Which comes
> down to the essence of your true identity, which can be confronting
> because it is not the identity you are used to employing to get along in
> the world. That identity tends to jack up when you discover it's been
> misleading you, or if you come along with the idea of unity, not as an
> alternative to separateness, but as the truth, as distinct from the
> illusion of separateness. We are one collective mind, whether we realise
> it or not.
You keep on mixing sane-observations with curve-balls and then some more
sane observations after. "Survival of what?", you said, for instance. Are
you maybe thinking we should all just drink the cool-aid or push-the-button
and be done with it already? On one hand I'm not so sure that's such a bad
idea, all things considered, but I'm just trying to figure you out. i.e.
what you value, what it would it take to "phase" you, what your ideal state
of being "evolved" is, what would make you happy-est. It almost sounds like
_dead_ and moved on, is where you really want to be, and maybe for your
molecules to be gathered up into some star again, or just raptured-up, one
more time, before that some-day ultimate big Black Hole party happens. Or do
you just wanna cut to the chase and find the nearest Black Hole and be one
with that, and just as soon as possible? Again, I'm not even value-judging
necessarily, because I don't have a hell of a lot of faith in humanity.
That's not true. I _do_ have faith that we _will_ destroy ourselves and
maybe sooner than we think.
Here's something that always cracked me up. Picture a gathering of
Peace-nics or Spiritual-ists praying for the Earth to be enveloped in a
blanket of radiant "white light", and then boom! someone pushes the button!
They got their wish! ;-) We _were_ of "one mind" after all!
>> It's hard-wired neurobiology and neurochemistry, isn't it? Feeling, feelings.
> Feelings seem to be something that happens to you as a result of outside
> stimuli, but they're not. Your reactions to outside stimuli are a
> conditioned response, and if you want to change your ability to respond
> you have to undo the conditioning.
>
> If you can change your belief about your feelings being hard wired you
> could be more open to the possibility of change, and then the
> possibility would become a potentiality in you and, with persistence, a
> reality. You literally change the world when you change yourself,
> because of the interconnectedness of all things.
Here you're mixing fact and fiction again. We _can_ change our belief
systems to some extent, but we don't have a choice as to how we respond to
many kinds of stimuli. Some yes, but much or most, no.
>> You can't have one without the other, pleasure/pain.
> Which is why the world cannot be a reflection of Reality. Reality could
> only be perfectly fulfilled and joyous. But that reality is accessible
> if you are willing to suspend belief in what you take for reality now.
Dude. I'm talking about basic duality or even tri-ality or quad-rality
reality. The state of being re-all-ed again? Is that your concept of
"reality", unity, uni-rality, being a star again or back in the Black Hole
nothingness, is all-ness, is being "one" with everything? If you were there,
and that, you would not "feel" joy, you wouldn't "feel" _anything_. "You"
would not exist, there would be no "I" as separate "I". There could only be
one "I", an "all-I". Re-all-I, add the suffix ity, for "the-state-of". So
again, the state of being Re-all-I(ed) is "Reality" to you. And the only
one that matters. That's fine and good but there would still be no "joy" in
it. IT would just "be", or "not be" anymore (depending on how you look at
it). It wouldn't give a shit. Which is what I said earlier. The Universe
doesn't care. Couldn't care. "It's all good" (to God, in the God-State of
Eternal "Reality").
>> Maybe cyborg-ness _is_ the answer. That's it! The Borg! They've got it right
>> ;-)
> I was thinking about this the other day. The Borg of course are very
> scary enemies of humanity in the Star Trek stories, but they represent
> an archetypal idea in the collective unconscious: the idea of unity, or
> all creation in communication with itself eternally. The idea is given
> scary connotations because it IS scary to those holding on to the idea
> that world has something to offer that they don't want to give up, hence
> the Borg. I know the world has nothing I want and nothing that will
> last, so the idea of the end of time is not scary to me. In fact, bring
> it on. But when it ends for me it doesn't mean it has to end for you.
> You have to decide that for yourself, but everyone does decide for peace
> eventually.
See, I was right (but I'm honestly not judging it or you). But you can't be
Eternally Joyful until and unless we all come with you, eventually. You need
us all to come along willingly, or maybe not willingly (I don't know, but I
suspect it doesn't matter). Only then can there be "one". What are you going
to do in the meantime? Your molecules will keep getting recycled and reused
until they all get sucked one by one into a big Black Hole, and then a
bigger black hole until there is only one. That's the only conceivable way
to stop "the cycle", yes? And you don't even have control of that. It's out
of your hands even if you do say "take me now". You can't get what you want
by willing it, nor even by just submitting to it, you alone. You don't have
the power, the control, the say, the choice.
We, and all things, _are_ already "one" in a sense, of course. But not "one"
enough to make the kind of leap and true "melding" you seem to be talking
about. And not "one" enough to have any kind of true lasting Peace, whether
it be the Earthy kind or the Eternal kind. We're not there yet, the Universe
as we can observe it is not evolved, not aged enough, and couldn't be for a
very very long time yet.
I'm not sure about a or "the" collective consciousness either. Seems more
like the collective unconsciousness. And by that I mean _stupid_
by-and-large, on average, averaged out, that is, the score is not very high,
seems to me. If there was a collective _unconsciousness_, of the kind you're
(I think) meaning, it might have to be that we are doomed, and we all do
want to be "one" again as well. We all probably know it, but we don't all
_know_ that we all know it (unconsciously if not consciously) yet. How's
that? Pretty nuts topic, this, Stephen. Let's just say we're a couple of
unRealistic humans playing around with some ideas. I'm sure you could agree
with that one ;-)
>> Heck, I'd submit to Ms. Nine's will any day, chances are. What's boy to do,
>> resist _that_? ;-) What-are-ya-nuts?!
> I quite like the Seven of Nine character and Jeri Ryan played it very
> well. I didn't think she was as good in Boston Public, just as Terry
> Farrell was much better in Deep Space Nine than in Becker.
I agree
> All judgements and opinions, not to be taken as meaningful. Who cares?
> --
> Stephen
Unity won't -- that's for sure. So reunification won't matter -- to them
who's reunified. So to be like Unity, like the Universe, we shouldn't care
bout nothin, cause it's all good. So why care about Peace and Joy and Bliss
and Abundance, and the like. Seems un-Godly to me. Who are we to care more
that Reality does in Reality?
Is there a way to end this on a high note?
How about some shrooms and a high-C ;-)
Roger
Stephen Calder
>
>
> Here you're mixing fact and fiction again. We _can_ change our belief
> systems to some extent, but we don't have a choice as to how we respond to
> many kinds of stimuli. Some yes, but much or most, no.
Everyone can. It's a matter of training. But what you believe is so
valuable to you that you won't countenance an alternative, so you're
locked in to that. You're denying yourself the power of your own mind.
>
>
>>> You can't have one without the other, pleasure/pain.
>
>
>> Which is why the world cannot be a reflection of Reality. Reality could
>> only be perfectly fulfilled and joyous. But that reality is accessible
>> if you are willing to suspend belief in what you take for reality now.
>
>
> Dude. I'm talking about basic duality or even tri-ality or quad-rality
> reality. The state of being re-all-ed again? Is that your concept of
> "reality", unity, uni-rality, being a star again or back in the Black Hole
> nothingness, is all-ness, is being "one" with everything? If you were there,
> and that, you would not "feel" joy, you wouldn't "feel" _anything_.
Since you have clearly not had the experience, I submit that you do not
know. Reality is not a concept, it just is. It is fulfilment.
"You"
> would not exist, there would be no "I" as separate "I". There could only be
> one "I", an "all-I". Re-all-I, add the suffix ity, for "the-state-of". So
> again, the state of being Re-all-I(ed) is "Reality" to you. And the only
> one that matters. That's fine and good but there would still be no "joy" in
> it. IT would just "be", or "not be" anymore (depending on how you look at
> it). It wouldn't give a shit. Which is what I said earlier. The Universe
> doesn't care. Couldn't care. "It's all good" (to God, in the God-State of
> Eternal "Reality").
Yep, it's all good to God and all good to me. Oneness is not oblivion,
though.
>
>
>>> Maybe cyborg-ness _is_ the answer. That's it! The Borg! They've got it right
>>> ;-)
>
>
>> I was thinking about this the other day. The Borg of course are very
>> scary enemies of humanity in the Star Trek stories, but they represent
>> an archetypal idea in the collective unconscious: the idea of unity, or
>> all creation in communication with itself eternally. The idea is given
>> scary connotations because it IS scary to those holding on to the idea
>> that world has something to offer that they don't want to give up, hence
>> the Borg. I know the world has nothing I want and nothing that will
>> last, so the idea of the end of time is not scary to me. In fact, bring
>> it on. But when it ends for me it doesn't mean it has to end for you.
>> You have to decide that for yourself, but everyone does decide for peace
>> eventually.
>
>
> See, I was right (but I'm honestly not judging it or you). But you can't be
> Eternally Joyful until and unless we all come with you, eventually.
Time is an illusion and already over. I'm happy because everyone DID
come to total peace with me.
You need
> us all to come along willingly, or maybe not willingly (I don't know, but I
> suspect it doesn't matter).
You can't be forced.
Only then can there be "one". What are you going
> to do in the meantime?
Celebrate. It's already happened.
Your molecules will keep getting recycled and reused
> until they all get sucked one by one into a big Black Hole, and then a
> bigger black hole until there is only one. That's the only conceivable way
> to stop "the cycle", yes? And you don't even have control of that. It's out
> of your hands even if you do say "take me now". You can't get what you want
> by willing it, nor even by just submitting to it, you alone. You don't have
> the power, the control, the say, the choice.
All power in earth and heaven is mine and yours as well. The question is
still, what do you want? You can have it. The universe is so determined
to give it to you that you already have exactly what and everything you
are asking for. If you don't like it, ask again.
> Unity won't -- that's for sure. So reunification won't matter -- to them
> who's reunified. So to be like Unity, like the Universe, we shouldn't care
> bout nothin, cause it's all good. So why care about Peace and Joy and Bliss
> and Abundance, and the like. Seems un-Godly to me. Who are we to care more
> that Reality does in Reality?
Reality IS those things. Joy and peace. How can it care about them? When
they are present there is nothing to care about.
>
> Is there a way to end this on a high note?
>
> How about some shrooms and a high-C ;-)
Whatever does it for you. I'm just gonna play some music.
--
Stephen
Ballina, Australia
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Stephen Calder <cal...@in.com.au>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 21:03:38 +1100
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
>
> Roger E. Blumberg wrote:
>
>>
>> Here you're mixing fact and fiction again. We _can_ change our belief
>> systems to some extent, but we don't have a choice as to how we respond to
>> many kinds of stimuli. Some yes, but much or most, no.
>
> Everyone can. It's a matter of training. But what you believe is so
> valuable to you that you won't countenance an alternative, so you're
> locked in to that. You're denying yourself the power of your own mind.
I'm sorry, but you're right, I can't buy that, whole-hog.
>>>> You can't have one without the other, pleasure/pain.
>>
>>
>>> Which is why the world cannot be a reflection of Reality. Reality could
>>> only be perfectly fulfilled and joyous. But that reality is accessible
>>> if you are willing to suspend belief in what you take for reality now.
>>
>>
>> Dude. I'm talking about basic duality or even tri-ality or quad-rality
>> reality. The state of being re-all-ed again? Is that your concept of
>> "reality", unity, uni-rality, being a star again or back in the Black Hole
>> nothingness, is all-ness, is being "one" with everything? If you were there,
>> and that, you would not "feel" joy, you wouldn't "feel" _anything_.
>
> Since you have clearly not had the experience, I submit that you do not
> know. Reality is not a concept, it just is. It is fulfilment.
But you clearly haven't either, experienced reality as you define it. Hence
you could not know what fulfillment feels like. But then, you won't have the
ability "to feel" once you _are_ fulfilled as you define fulfillment. So
it's really quite nuts. I don't get it, and I admit it.
>> "You" would not exist, there would be no "I" as separate "I". There could
>>only be
>> one "I", an "all-I". Re-all-I, add the suffix ity, for "the-state-of". So
>> again, the state of being Re-all-I(ed) is "Reality" to you. And the only
>> one that matters. That's fine and good but there would still be no "joy" in
>> it. IT would just "be", or "not be" anymore (depending on how you look at
>> it). It wouldn't give a shit. Which is what I said earlier. The Universe
>> doesn't care. Couldn't care. "It's all good" (to God, in the God-State of
>> Eternal "Reality").
> Yep, it's all good to God and all good to me. Oneness is not oblivion,
> though.
Of course it is. Of course oneness is oblivion. If there is no "other" there
in no "there". If there's no "there" there can only be "here". If there is
no "there" there is no "thing-ness" and "no-thing else" -- meaning there is
nothing, zed, zero, oblivion.
What you want and are describing, I think, is actually _zero_, not one. Zero
could not conceive of the idea of 1. 1 is alone, and separate. Zero is
oblivion, and that's what you're wanting. Maybe we're all wanting it, who
knows. If there is 1 there is "something", and then there is everything
else, i.e. "the nothing-ness" apart from 1 is "the else". You want true and
total absolute nothing-ness, which is zero. Black Holes I guess are Zero.
They will absorb, assimilate, every last "1" until there is only "0".
Absolute Zero, the last and biggest Black-Hole, would have no way to gauge
an otherness, a 1-ness, a something apart from 0, itself. It not only
couldn't, there simply would be nothing else apart from itself. Zero
couldn't compute a "1", 0+0=0. And it would have no need to, no desire to,
no motive or will to. It would be complete, whole, hole, 0. All same.
O-blivion.
No Peace, no Joy, no Pain, no Sorrow, just Sameness. And no consciousness
either. There would be no "other" and no-"thing" apart, to be conscious
_of_.
>>>> Maybe cyborg-ness _is_ the answer. That's it! The Borg! They've got it
>>>> right
>>>> ;-)
>>
>>
>>> I was thinking about this the other day. The Borg of course are very
>>> scary enemies of humanity in the Star Trek stories, but they represent
>>> an archetypal idea in the collective unconscious: the idea of unity, or
>>> all creation in communication with itself eternally. The idea is given
>>> scary connotations because it IS scary to those holding on to the idea
>>> that world has something to offer that they don't want to give up, hence
>>> the Borg. I know the world has nothing I want and nothing that will
>>> last, so the idea of the end of time is not scary to me. In fact, bring
>>> it on. But when it ends for me it doesn't mean it has to end for you.
>>> You have to decide that for yourself, but everyone does decide for peace
>>> eventually.
>>
>>
>> See, I was right (but I'm honestly not judging it or you). But you can't be
>> Eternally Joyful until and unless we all come with you, eventually.
> Time is an illusion and already over. I'm happy because everyone DID
> come to total peace with me.
that's an interesting thought. Twilight-Zone, but interesting.
>> You need
>> us all to come along willingly, or maybe not willingly (I don't know, but I
>> suspect it doesn't matter).
>
> You can't be forced.
we can have no "will" out side of our living bodies and with an intact
brain.
> Only then can there be "one". What are you going
>> to do in the meantime?
> Celebrate. It's already happened.
Again, Twilight-Zone, but interesting, and it might just be, who knows.
>> Your molecules will keep getting recycled and reused
>> until they all get sucked one by one into a big Black Hole, and then a
>> bigger black hole until there is only one. That's the only conceivable way
>> to stop "the cycle", yes? And you don't even have control of that. It's out
>> of your hands even if you do say "take me now". You can't get what you want
>> by willing it, nor even by just submitting to it, you alone. You don't have
>> the power, the control, the say, the choice.
> All power in earth and heaven is mine and yours as well.
nah, don't buy it.
> The question is
> still, what do you want? You can have it. The universe is so determined
> to give it to you that you already have exactly what and everything you
> are asking for. If you don't like it, ask again.
I like the sound of that, it's very seductive, but . . .
>> Unity won't -- that's for sure. So reunification won't matter -- to them
>> who's reunified. So to be like Unity, like the Universe, we shouldn't care
>> bout nothin, cause it's all good. So why care about Peace and Joy and Bliss
>> and Abundance, and the like. Seems un-Godly to me. Who are we to care more
>> than Reality does in Reality?
> Reality IS those things. Joy and peace. How can it care about them? When
> they are present there is nothing to care about.
Reality, as you define it, is _oblivion_ -- sameness, no else-ness. We might
call that Peace, Tranquility, free from struggles, restfulness, inactivity.
It's oblivion Stephen, the ultimate cosmic-scale total and complete death.
>> Is there a way to end this on a high note?
>> How about some shrooms and a high-C ;-)
> Whatever does it for you. I'm just gonna play some music.
Sleep would be good.
night night.
Roger
RPM1
"Les Cargill" <lcar...@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:45cd3e49$0$24455$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
> RPM1 wrote:
>
>> "Les Cargill" <lcar...@cfl.rr.com> wrote in
>>
>>
>>>In the 1960s, a Dumbness Festival started. It's still going on. It
>>>will likely never be curtailed. So we are all better off embracing
>>>the Dumbness and working within it.
>>>
>>>Think about it. In the 1940s, Fun was dancing to Benny Goodman or
>>>possibly Bob Wills, possibly consuming alcohol.
>>>
>>>In the '60s, it was dancing in the mud to Hendrix and consuming LSD.
>>>
>>>How is that *possibly* an improvement? I have nothing against
>>>mud or Hendrix, but the combo seems... less fun than Goodman
>>>and a little hooch on dry land.
>>>
>>
>>
>> In my mind, Hendrix is a continuation of Goodman.
>
> Um, no. I am very, very sorry to inform you of this, but no.
>
> Benny Goodman was a total control freak with an ear. He ground
> it out for decades. He beat his people to *death* to
> get that sound. He was not nice about it. It was war.
>
> Benny Goodman represents a will that Hendrix never exhibited.
> *Zappa* was in the Benny Goodman tradition.
>
> Now, if you'd said "a continuation of Bob Wills", thn I would be forced to
> agree with you.
>
You're talking about the process of making music, I'm talking about the
music.
Zappa's music never appealed to the masses.
>> They both took the general public's taste to a new place. They are
>> linked by the freedom they found in music. Birds of different feathers
>> to be sure, but both were beautilful flyers.
>
> And that is most cetrainly true. But Hendrix in front of the
> Woodstock audience is *far* too reminicsent of pigs for the
> phrase "pearls before swine" to not resonate.
>
Different clothes, different venue, same pigs. The pigs are always there
and always will be. To be fair to Hendrix you have to remember that
Goodman's fans weren't all about the music either. I think there was some
dancing going on...
Patrick
Lumpy
> ...To be fair to Hendrix you have to remember
> that Goodman's fans weren't all about the music
> either. I think there was some dancing going on...
And it was just as "evil" and "mind rotting" to the
parents of those Goodman fans as it was to the
parents of the Hendrix or the [insert artist here] fans.
I'm quite certain that somewhere in history, some
Queen said -
"M'Lord, I'm worried. Young George II doth constantly
listen to that Beethoven fellow. Twill surely
rotteth his soul"
Lumpy
--
You Played on Lawrence Welk?
Yes but no blue notes. Just blue hairs.
www.lumpyguitar.net
kitekrazy
> Les Cargill wrote:
>
>
>>Music teaches people harmony/ratios, balance, form
>>and "what happens next." Clearly, these skills are
>>a liability in the workplace.
>
>
> Music also teaches people, uh, music. Kids in school
> could certainly grow up to be musicians just like
> they could grow up to be mathematicians or
> historians or English literaturians.
>
>
> Lumpy
Most people regret in their life time not being able to play a musical
instrument. At least music in school has the chance to plant that seed.
Much of the popular music is void of melody. Music in school gives
them the opportunity to sing melodies. It's quite evident by how kids
sing what is listened to at home.
Interesting that some cultures that are skilled in the maths and
sciences are also have an appreciation for the performing arts.
kitekrazy
> Lumpy wrote:
>
>> Les Cargill wrote:
>>
>>> Music teaches people harmony/ratios, balance, form
>>> and "what happens next." Clearly, these skills are
>>> a liability in the workplace.
>>
>>
>> Music also teaches people, uh, music. Kids in school
>> could certainly grow up to be musicians just like
>> they could grow up to be mathematicians or
>> historians or English literaturians.
>>
>>
>> Lumpy
>
>
> of "Mozart was born xxxx and died xxxxx and wrote xxxx (Left no
> impression as you can see). It was another history lesson. We learned
> stave notes and time values, but just as theory which was mindnumbingly
> boring. Violin lessons were available at a cost, but only if you had
> first learned recorder... BORING!!!! Guitars were considered tools of
> satan.
>
Sure it left an impression, otherwise we wouldn't read about it. It
has no value if it is treated like knowing your multiplication tables.
I never teach recorder. It's often used in recruiting for wind
instruments. Recorders need less air while wind instruments require more
air. Brass don't have keys either.
No point teaching notes on the staff if it can be applied.
> Things have changed now, my stepsons were coming home with demo's they
> had laid down in the schools studio, using the schools gear. Guess I was
> born too soon :(
Nor can every school provide that.
Lumpy
> Most people regret in their life
> time not being able to play a
You guys with day jobs...Ever been to the
company picnic or xmas party and played
your instrument or sang? The co-workers
think it's like magic. "Wow Ralph. I thought
you were just an accountant. I didn't know
you were a musician too. You should try out
for Americal Idol!"
I believe that most people think anyone could
be an accountant or a dentist or a welder or
any other non-music related profession. But they
think that you've got some kind of "music gene"
or some other magic component when you're
a musician. Even some on this group seem
to entertain that theory.
Don't let on. Let them think you're some kind
of one in a million. Don't shatter the mystique.
kitekrazy
>
>
> With the Intraweb and all, I think it's easier for the kiddies to get
> started.
>
> Raymo.
>
>
You'd be surprised how many kids don't realize the web is a great
library. To them a computer is a juke box and game system. To them
literacy is not important and using the web it's a necessity.
kitekrazy
>
> I believe that most people think anyone could
> be an accountant or a dentist or a welder or
> any other non-music related profession. But they
> think that you've got some kind of "music gene"
> or some other magic component when you're
> a musician. Even some on this group seem
> to entertain that theory.
>
> Don't let on. Let them think you're some kind
> of one in a million. Don't shatter the mystique.
>
>
> Lumpy
Albert Schweitzer was a musician.
Lumpy
> Albert Schweitzer was a musician.
Richard Nixon
Bill Clinton
Condie Rice
all musicians.
Bob Dylan,
still working on it.
Stephen Calder
> But you clearly haven't either, experienced reality as you define it.
Are you sure?
It is actually possible to have an experience of total unity and
connectedness and to be completely happy even though still apparently
having a bodily experience.
Hence
> you could not know what fulfillment feels like. But then, you won't have the
> ability "to feel" once you _are_ fulfilled as you define fulfillment.
You don't know how I define it. You think oneness is oblivion.
>
>
> Of course it is. Of course oneness is oblivion. If there is no "other" there
> in no "there". If there's no "there" there can only be "here". If there is
> no "there" there is no "thing-ness" and "no-thing else" -- meaning there is
> nothing, zed, zero, oblivion.
Yep. That's how the ordinary identity typically characterises the bliss
of union, because it's scared of it.
>
> Reality, as you define it, is _oblivion_ -- sameness, no else-ness. We might
> call that Peace, Tranquility, free from struggles, restfulness, inactivity.
> It's oblivion Stephen, the ultimate cosmic-scale total and complete death.
No. You haven't understood. But clearly you don't want to to, so this is
pointless.
--
Stephen
Ballina, Australia
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Stephen Calder <cal...@in.com.au>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 08:08:52 +1100
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
>
> Roger E. Blumberg wrote:
>
>> But you clearly haven't either, experienced reality as you define it.
>
> Are you sure?
Yes. I'm sure you haven't experienced Reality as you define it.
> It is actually possible to have an experience of total unity and
> connectedness and to be completely happy even though still apparently
> having a bodily experience.
No, it's not possible. You've already admitted it and insisted upon it, that
Earthly reality (which means being embodied) is not "Reality", and therefore
anything one experiences while embodied doesn't count. That's where you came
in.
>> Hence
>> you could not know what fulfillment feels like. But then, you won't have the
>> ability "to feel" once you _are_ fulfilled as you define fulfillment.
> You don't know how I define it. You think oneness is oblivion.
You think final real fulfillment is bliss and love, is Unity, is all
sameness. You've said it over and over again. I know how you define it. What
I don't know, I guess, is how you define Oblivion. How does Oblivion differ
from your idealized ultimate final "Reality"-state. What's absent or present
in "Oblivion" that's not absent or present in your final Eternal-"Reality"?
And don't say "Love and Bliss" because we all know that's ka-ka. There is no
"feeling" of any kind in THE END.
>> Of course it is. Of course oneness is oblivion. If there is no "other" there
>> in no "there". If there's no "there" there can only be "here". If there is
>> no "there" there is no "thing-ness" and "no-thing else" -- meaning there is
>> nothing, zed, zero, oblivion.
> Yep. That's how the ordinary identity typically characterises the bliss
> of union, because it's scared of it.
I'm not scared of it. _You_ are. I'm not scared that it is and will be
*devoid* of all _feeling_, you are. You think it has to be defined and
described as "Love". I'm saying there will be no feeling period. And you're
afraid to think of no feeling, because "no feeling" means "no love", "no
bliss", (among other things).
>> Reality, as you define it, is _oblivion_ -- sameness, no else-ness. We might
>> call that Peace, Tranquility, free from struggles, restfulness, inactivity.
>> It's oblivion Stephen, the ultimate cosmic-scale total and complete death.
> No. You haven't understood. But clearly you don't want to to, so this is
> pointless.
No, I have understood, completely.
And there _is_ a point, still. Pointlessness is the thing you deify, it's
Unity, it's your ultimate Eternal "Reality" -- which has not been achieved
yet (unless we play your "time is an illusion and everything has already
happened" game). When you finally get what you want there _will_ be
Pointlessness, no Points, all-same = 0. Your "Reality" is "Pointless",
literally -- and it is Unity-in-death. It is oblivion.
But don't feel bad, because all Spirituality and all Religion is/are the
same. Taken to it's ultimate conclusion, you-all are-all one-and-the-same,
already. We who don't believe in such things, any of those only slightly
different clothings and belief-systems (as one), already _admit_ it's all
_pointless_ ultimately. In other words, we know where _you're_ (all) going.
_You don't_. We're waiting for _you_ to quit playing games. We _are_ all the
same, already. You're the ones who "think" your _different_, and special,
and evolved, and "Godly", and have a "lock" on Truth. You think the
Ultimate conclusion, the final solution, Unity, is a state of Bliss and
Love. _You're_ the ones who're _delusional_, playing games, and need to
"evolve", need to become "conscious" of what you're _really_ wishing,
hoping, and waiting for ;-) Silly humans. Awaken!
This is the final solution. 0+0=0
We are the same.
Pure and total Spirit is All-Spirit, is 0, and nothing else. If there is
nothing else there is Oblivion. The end. Game over.
So the final question, if there was someone or something left to ask it and
ask of, is . . .
"Who won"? ;-)
Everyone wins, all win, 0+0=0, no difference, no way to tell, nothing to
distinguish, all the same, all are oblivious, all is obliviousness in
Oblivion. Neutral and neutered, dead, out of commissions, nothing left to
do, no mission, no missionary's. Pure Nothingness. All same. No potential.
No motives. No feeling. No Envy. No Aspiration. Nothing to appreciate and
no-one to appreciate it. All is dead -- with God.
Roger
Stephen Calder
>
>
> You think final real fulfillment is bliss and love, is Unity, is all
> sameness. You've said it over and over again. I know how you define it. What
> I don't know, I guess, is how you define Oblivion. How does Oblivion differ
> from your idealized ultimate final "Reality"-state. What's absent or present
> in "Oblivion" that's not absent or present in your final Eternal-"Reality"?
> And don't say "Love and Bliss" because we all know that's ka-ka. There is no
> "feeling" of any kind in THE END.
>
If love and bliss are shit to you then you won't have them.
--
Stephen
Ballina, Australia
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Stephen Calder <cal...@in.com.au>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:06:11 +1100
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
They're not shit to me in _Earthly_ reality. But to get to where _you_ want
to go, your "Eternal Reality", you have to "let go" of _everything_,
including love and bliss. That's the difference. I _know_ that, and you
don't. "Everything" means _everything_.
Stephen, I don't mean to belittle your belief-systems by poking holes in
your thinking process, but you seemed to want to go there. I wanted and
agreed to go there with you simply to try to understand where you're coming
from, what your beliefs are. Whether we want to or not we _will_ "be one"
again some eon from now. I guess our differences have more to do with what
we think we'll find there, what will be and exist there, once we get there.
I'm willing to call it "Peace and Contentment", Fulfillment, but simply
because (or to the extent that) there will be none of "the opposite". There
will be _nothing_, period. Nothing means nothing. No opposites. Same.
Oblivion.
That's the best I can do, the closest we can come, in philosophy.
Peace
Roger
raymo
news:L9mzh.5438$o61....@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
That's true, but those hungry enough will look for the brain food. The
information you were able to get your hands on in the days of yore pale in
comparison to what's available in this day and age.
That said, the *digital divide* will ensure there are still some folk left
behind who have to learn stuff like they did back in the day, but for those
with a 30 dollar a month internet account...You have a world of knowledge at
your fingertips, and for the most part it's free.
Just some of the stuff I've read on this NG would have cost me hundreds of
dollars in text a few years back. And some of the diatribe that ensues many
posts is totally priceless :-)
Raymo.
Stephen Calder
>
>> From: Stephen Calder <cal...@in.com.au>
>> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
>> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 11:06:11 +1100
>> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
>>
>> Roger E. Blumberg wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> You think final real fulfillment is bliss and love, is Unity, is all
>>> sameness. You've said it over and over again. I know how you define it. What
>>> I don't know, I guess, is how you define Oblivion. How does Oblivion differ
>>> from your idealized ultimate final "Reality"-state. What's absent or present
>>> in "Oblivion" that's not absent or present in your final Eternal-"Reality"?
>>> And don't say "Love and Bliss" because we all know that's ka-ka. There is no
>>> "feeling" of any kind in THE END.
>>>
>> If love and bliss are shit to you then you won't have them.
>>
>> --
>> Stephen
>> Ballina, Australia
>
>
> They're not shit to me in _Earthly_ reality.
Then what stops you from having them now?
But to get to where _you_ want
> to go, your "Eternal Reality", you have to "let go" of _everything_,
> including love and bliss.
There's nowhere I need to go. Everything is perfect as it is. Letting go
of everything means letting go of everything temporal. Love is eternal.
That means we are it now and are just learning to give it in order to
have it and to know that's what we are.
That's the difference. I _know_ that, and you
> don't. "Everything" means _everything_.
>
> Stephen, I don't mean to belittle your belief-systems by poking holes in
> your thinking process, but you seemed to want to go there.
You can't belittle my belief system. All I need to know is that it works
for me and if it's not working I need to examine my beliefs again.
Nothing you think or say can poke holes in the reality that is my
source. I'm perfectly secure in that.
I wanted and
> agreed to go there with you simply to try to understand where you're coming
> from, what your beliefs are. Whether we want to or not we _will_ "be one"
> again some eon from now.
We are one now.
I guess our differences have more to do with what
> we think we'll find there, what will be and exist there, once we get there.
All differences are temporary. There's nothing to wait for.
>
> I'm willing to call it "Peace and Contentment", Fulfillment, but simply
> because (or to the extent that) there will be none of "the opposite".
Very well put.
There
> will be _nothing_, period.
Uh oh. This contradicts peace and contentment.
Nothing means nothing. No opposites. Same.
> Oblivion.
Impossible.
>
> That's the best I can do, the closest we can come, in philosophy.
>
> Peace
Do you really want it? Then it's yours.
Peace
Stephen
--
Stephen
Ballina, Australia
Charmed Snark
alt.guitar.beginner:
> kitekrazy wrote:
>> Most people regret in their life
>> time not being able to play a
>> musical instrument...
>
> You guys with day jobs...Ever been to the
> company picnic or xmas party and played
> your instrument or sang? The co-workers
> think it's like magic. "Wow Ralph. I thought
> you were just an accountant. I didn't know
> you were a musician too. You should try out
> for Americal Idol!"
That explains a lot of people who thought
they were A. Idol material! Well, it makes
good entertainment in the initial rounds
at least. ;-)
> I believe that most people think anyone could
> be an accountant or a dentist or a welder or
> any other non-music related profession. But they
> think that you've got some kind of "music gene"
> or some other magic component when you're
> a musician. Even some on this group seem
> to entertain that theory.
>
> Don't let on. Let them think you're some kind
> of one in a million. Don't shatter the mystique.
>
> Lumpy
Some good points, lump.
Snark.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: "Lumpy" <lu...@digitalcartography.com>
> Organization: lumpymusic.org
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 09:12:07 -0700
> Subject: Re: K.I.S.S.
>
> kitekrazy wrote:
>> Most people regret in their life
>> time not being able to play a
>> musical instrument...
>
> You guys with day jobs...Ever been to the
> company picnic or xmas party and played
> your instrument or sang? The co-workers
> think it's like magic. "Wow Ralph. I thought
> you were just an accountant. I didn't know
> you were a musician too. You should try out
> for Americal Idol!"
>
> I believe that most people think anyone could
> be an accountant or a dentist or a welder or
> any other non-music related profession. But they
> think that you've got some kind of "music gene"
> or some other magic component when you're
> a musician. Even some on this group seem
> to entertain that theory.
>
> Don't let on. Let them think you're some kind
> of one in a million. Don't shatter the mystique.
On a given day I can argue your point as well as anyone. But I'm afraid
American Idol (if not MTV and BET) _is_ all the proof we need that it ain't
as simple as you'd like to think Lumpy. And no amount of "brute force" will
change those facts. Talent _exists_, it's in the mix, it makes a difference.
Does that mean that music and music-edu, or the arts in general, should be
restricted or limited, practiced, experienced, and enjoyed, by only a select
few? No. It simply means that on a sliding-scale some have more of "it" than
others. Failing to recognize that does no-one any service.
A good teacher will recognize talent, be on the _look-out_ for talent. Heck,
that's what keep's many teachers going it in the end, helping to develop and
nurture talent, recognizing gifts and "the gifted". It's not only an honor
it's a _must_. Civilization and culture _depend_ upon it! The _developed
talents_ of "others" is what what keeps us ALL going -- literally and
figuratively. That we all be allowed and facilitated, encouraged and
nurtured, in developing our own unique gifts, whatever they may be, is what
education *should* be about, but very rarely is.
Our current new track, the "cookie-cutter standardization" philosophy and
practice of education, and mandated by Federal Law! no less, is the absolute
best way to guarantee that the likes you, Lumpy, will get your way. There's
no room for talent, no room for _individuality_ -- which is what talent
_is_, what Art is, developed individuality. People being all _they_ can be,
not what "The Law" says they _must_ be. Failing to recognize and nurture
_talents_, and institutionalizing that kind of thoughtlessness, is
_criminal_. Period. The highest of crimes against all, and the good of all.
Have it your way (and suffer the consequences, we will).
Roger