pickpockets London
grey
wrote:
>South American thieves hit London
>
>by Philip Nettleton
>Londoners are facing an unprecedented blitz from gangs of specially
>trained South American pickpockets who have flown in to target
>high-spending Christmas revellers.
Time to invest in hidden inside-the-pants wallets...
Mike
Also watch out for the "young girl gangs" who try to get you into
conversation, whilst the others crowd you .......dipping.
--
-
Mike Peters
Drop the DROPME to reply by Email
Simon Kelly
Time to tighten up the immigration laws!
ching-ching <b...@madasafish.com> wrote in message
news:nfkk1usefh3u2ciev...@4ax.com...
> South American thieves hit London
>
> by Philip Nettleton
> Londoners are facing an unprecedented blitz from gangs of specially
> trained South American pickpockets who have flown in to target
> high-spending Christmas revellers.
>
> Detectives have identified organised teams from Chile and Brazil who
> stay in the capital over the holiday period and steal thousands of
> pounds every day - at a time when shops, restaurants, pubs and bars
> are packed with people carrying large amounts of money.
>
> To combat the menace officers are now going undercover as pub, bar and
> club doormen.
>
> Detectives claim the thieves are trained at "Fagin" schools at home.
> The masterclasses teach them how to steal a bell from a pocket without
> it ringing and razor blades without cutting hands.
>
> Detective Chief Inspector Steve Morgan said today: "There is a lot of
> money washing around and some people have a number of gold cards in
> their wallets. Thousands of pounds can be taken within minutes of the
> theft and a laptop can be sold immediately through the right channels.
> We need to warn people to be vigilant."
>
> The thieves work in teams and have developed a range of techniques to
> distract victims as they carry out the thefts - often without people
> realising anything has been taken.
>
> The crime teams will approach their victim after cash has been
> withdrawn from the bank and, for example, "accidentally" spill coffee
> over the target. As they apologise and try and rub it off the wallet
> will be taken from an inside pocket.
>
> The foreign teams stay at hotels in Bayswater and Earls Court often
> arriving in the UK posing as families. Their faces are unknown to
> police and so they are relatively free to go about their illicit
> trade.
>
> They also pick a table in a restaurant or pub and once they have
> distracted the victim or just picked up a discarded bag other members
> will hit shops and banks with credit cards.
>
> DCI Morgan added: "These teams are coming from all over the world, but
> especially South America and Eastern Europe, specifically to target
> people in central London and the City."
>
> He said: "Officers will be working in bars as bouncers and also
> mingling with drinkers to look out for offenders. The thieves are
> often easy for police to spot but after a few drinks people can become
> careless." Credit cards taken in London are often used across the
> country within hours of being stolen.
>
> Officers recently arrested a thief, posing as a City worker, who would
> sit in a bar with an umbrella which had a hook attached to the end so
> he could pull bags and jackets away from victims.
>
> On other occasions pickpockets have stolen wallets and gone on a
> shopping spree and returned the credit card back into the suit pocket
> later that day. One man lost a £50,000 watch after he was duped in a
> distraction theft.
>
> Police are concerned that, as businesses cut back on the traditional
> office party, it is expected there will be more impromptu gatherings
> at bars and nightclubs.
>
> In the City, police are using street theatre in pubs and clubs to get
> the message across to members of the public to look after belongings.
>
> Officers are distributing hundreds of posters and leaflets to City
> firms and their workers warning about thefts. Between records, DJs
> will be giving clubbers regular reminders to look after their handbags
> and wallets. Hotline numbers have been set up for bar staff to call if
> they spot one of the men in the police most wanted list.
>
>
>
>
>
Rita
wrote:
>
>Also watch out for the "young girl gangs" who try to get you into
>conversation, whilst the others crowd you .......dipping.
>--
Pickpockets present no threat if you wear a money belt,
and keep in that belt your plane tickets, passport, credit
cards and most of your cash. Why more travelers do not
protect their valuables in this way is one of life's little
mysteries. The money belt is worn under clothing, just
in case anyone wonders:)
Lennart Petersen
"Rita" <nit...@nyc.rr.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:qc2l1ugl3kg1fpnp8...@4ax.com...
> >--
> Pickpockets present no threat if you wear a money belt,
> and keep in that belt your plane tickets, passport, credit
> cards and most of your cash.
belt.
Nothing lost so far.
Why more travelers do not
> protect their valuables in this way is one of life's little
> mysteries.
Perhaps the rest of us have reason to be thankful to them :-)
When there's easy targets there's no reason for the crime to escalate in
more violent form ??
L.P
Go Fig
"Lennart Petersen" <lennart....@swipnet.se> wrote:
> "Rita" <nit...@nyc.rr.com> skrev i meddelandet
> news:qc2l1ugl3kg1fpnp8...@4ax.com...
> > >--
> > Pickpockets present no threat if you wear a money belt,
> > and keep in that belt your plane tickets, passport, credit
> > cards and most of your cash.
> I'm used to the "Interrail-bag" inside my shirt. Works as well as a money
> belt.
I much prefer this type too... access is far easier.
jay
Fri, Dec 14, 2001
mailto:go...@mac.com
> Nothing lost so far.
>
> Why more travelers do not
> > protect their valuables in this way is one of life's little
> > mysteries.
> Perhaps the rest of us have reason to be thankful to them :-)
> When there's easy targets there's no reason for the crime to escalate in
> more violent form ??
> L.P
>
>
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
sjoerd
> Pickpockets present no threat if you wear a money belt,
> and keep in that belt your plane tickets, passport, credit
> cards and most of your cash.
Passport, plane tickets, and most of the cash belong in a hotel safe.
Only on the day of arrival and departure do you need passport and plane
tickets. Just carry your one-day cash needs and one debit card (which
needs a PIN) with you, and you'll do fine without money belts and other
inconveniences. Has worked well for me during 24 years of travelling.
Sjoerd
NY Boy
>> and keep in that belt your plane tickets, passport, credit
>> cards and most of your cash.
>I'm used to the "Interrail-bag" inside my shirt. Works as well as a money
>belt.
>Nothing lost so far.
agree. i met 2 pickpockets (a couple) in Camdem Town. the man stole my
wallet while the women passed me by and touch my arm and said something to
me. Fortunately, i have only few pounds and some traveler cheques in the
wallet and put my id- card, airticket and cards in the "Interrail-bag".
BEWARE OF COUPLE, TOO.
Joanne
Nightjar
"grey" <n...@available.com> wrote in message
news:6fpk1ukimf5kl1sop...@4ax.com...
I've used those as my normal wallet for years. Then again, I was brought up
in London and even decades ago, probably like most big cities, pickpockets
working crowded shopping streets, particularly around Christmas, was a known
hazard. It doesn't really matter whether they have been trained in South
America or the East End if you happen to be the victim.
Colin Bignell
Louise Smith
Thanks.
Louise
news:gofig-F435F1....@lsnewsr3-27.we.mediaone.net...
Polycarpe III
safety pin to close it. Works great!
"ching-ching" <b...@madasafish.com> wrote in message
news:nfkk1usefh3u2ciev...@4ax.com...
> South American thieves hit London
>
> by Philip Nettleton
> Londoners are facing an unprecedented blitz from gangs of specially
> trained South American pickpockets who have flown in to target
> high-spending Christmas revellers.
>
NY Boy
you can buy it in the shops selling suitcases. (maybe you can find it in
some airport duty free shops)
Louise Smith <swan...@adelphia.net> wrote in message
T7HS7.3383$QK1.1...@news1.news.adelphia.net...
David Lewis
<nit...@nyc.rr.com> writes
>>--
>Pickpockets present no threat if you wear a money belt,
>and keep in that belt your plane tickets, passport, credit
>cards and most of your cash. Why more travelers do not
>protect their valuables in this way is one of life's little
>mysteries. The money belt is worn under clothing, just
>in case anyone wonders:)
These money belts must be quite bulky if you have all that in them.
Do they not rather spoil the look of your clothing on some occasions?
I am large enough round the middle without adding further bulk and that
is why I do not wear the.
Vanity, vanity, all is vanity.......
Marie
--
Ma...@nodanw.demon.co.uk
Lennart Petersen
"sjoerd" <sjoerd...@xs4all.nl> skrev i meddelandet
news:3C1B0362...@xs4all.nl...
> Rita wrote:
>
> > Pickpockets present no threat if you wear a money belt,
> > and keep in that belt your plane tickets, passport, credit
> > cards and most of your cash.
>
> Passport, plane tickets, and most of the cash belong in a hotel safe.
> Only on the day of arrival and departure do you need passport and plane
> tickets. Just carry your one-day cash needs and one debit card (which
No trouble while you are staying somewhere but remember you are much
vulnerable while moving. And remember rail stations,air ports and the
transportation to/from airports are heavens for pickpockets
, and you'll do fine without money belts and other
> inconveniences.
How can you say it's inconvenient ? I've the big stuff in the interrailbag
and know perfectly where it is all the time. Smaller amount of money for
daily use is in the wallet. Just at the passport control or so I have to
"fish up" the bag for some seconds or so.
>Has worked well for me during 24 years of travelling.
Probably right, you can survive for a long time.
L.P
devil
> styles:
>
> http://www.letravelstore.com/security.htm
>
> I am not pushing this site, but it does give you a good
> idea of what is available and the prices.
>
> Wearing a money belt/pouch makes travel so much more
> relaxing -- not having to be concerned about pickpockets or
> other theft. Don't leave home without one:)
Oh no? The money belt cult is back. Trying to convert us once more :-(.
Not again @#%&&$#...
devil
>
> On Sat, 15 Dec 2001 15:59:36 GMT, devil <de...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >Oh no? The money belt cult is back. Trying to convert us once more :-(.
> >
> >Not again @#%&&$#...
>
> do not know about money belts, which is why I bring them up
> on travel newsgroups when pickpocketing and theft are
> discussed. If that offends you, perhaps you have better ideas?
You of course wear yours in your hometown too, right?
David Lewis
<nit...@nyc.rr.com> writes
>I live in New York City, which has its share of thieves, but
>I don't go about town with my passport or plane tickets. I do not
>carry a purse. I never take "everything" with
>me, just the money or card I may need that day, and distribute
>it among inner pockets under my outer clothing. On occasion
>I have need of a bag or purse to carry other stuff in, but my
>money or credit card or bank card is always elsewhere.
I cannot imagine having to live like this.
Thank you for the information: we now know not to visit New York city, a
place we were considering.
We will stick to the lovely countryside areas.
Marie
--
Ma...@nodanw.demon.co.uk
Calif Bill
it, no cards in case of this. You lose 50 bucks and some faith in mankind.
The problem of losing your wallet and Identification on vacation, especially
in a foreign country, is much worse than at home. At home you can go to
your bank and get cash for the week, and get new credit cards delivered,
with out much hassle. Get a new drivers license. But try that while in a
land far, far away from home.
Bill
Rita wrote in message ...
>Then you are being very silly. With a bit of caution, such as a
>money belt or pouch, you can traverse the city with complete
>ease. The city is very safe so far as any personal attack is
>concerned. But there are pickpockets who are able to recognize
>tourists, and our crowded subway trains and stations do sometimes
>present opportunities for theft. New York is no different in this
>respect than any other large city in the world -- Paris, London, Rome
>etc. And many smaller cities as well.
>
>Exactly the same tactics are used by pickpockets in the
>Paris Metro and New York subways -- one is to bump into someone
>going up or coming down an escalator and pick the pocket
>in the confusion -- or have a confederate who does. I have
>known people who were victims to this ploy in both cities.
>
>One needs to grow up and reallize the world is not divided
>between perfectly safe and unsafe cities or areas. There are
>some basic rules for security of self and possessions that are
>not unduly difficult to follow and they are worth learning and
>following so you can have a pleasant trip wherever you choose
>to go. For example, people warn of pickpockets and gypsy
>kids and the like in Rome -- would I stay away? Of course, not.
>With a money belt, there is no need to worry.
LStrom
<Da...@nodanw.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In that case, don't go to LA, Detroit, Chicago or Miami. Boston might be
okay though I had my wallet picked on the subway when I lived there. I
always felt safe there, anyway. Plan to carry your money and passport in
inside pockets or a neck pouch or a money belt all the same.
--
Leslie Strom - Get Lost Magazine
http://www.getlostmagazine.com
A Journal of Natural and Unnatural Events
7/1/00 226/195/156-146
David Lewis
<nit...@nyc.rr.com> writes
>
Do not be so personal.
>With a bit of caution, such as a
>money belt or pouch, you can traverse the city with complete
>ease.
I do not wish to be constantly concerned for the safety of my
belongings.
> The city is very safe so far as any personal attack is
>concerned. But there are pickpockets who are able to recognize
>tourists, and our crowded subway trains and stations do sometimes
>present opportunities for theft. New York is no different in this
>respect than any other large city in the world -- Paris, London, Rome
>etc. And many smaller cities as well.
When I go to London I behave just as I would in my home town.
You must be very used to robbery.
>
>Exactly the same tactics are used by pickpockets in the
>Paris Metro
Never happened to me and I lived there for a year!
>and New York subways -- one is to bump into someone
>going up or coming down an escalator and pick the pocket
>in the confusion -- or have a confederate who does. I have
>known people who were victims to this ploy in both cities.
I wish to avoid this. What is odd about that?
>
>One needs to grow up
At 65, I think I am "grown up" enough.
>and reallize the world is not divided
>between perfectly safe and unsafe cities or areas. There are
>some basic rules for security of self and possessions that are
>not unduly difficult to follow and they are worth learning and
>following so you can have a pleasant trip wherever you choose
>to go.
We often visit the USA. We have never felt the need to be so cautious.
I must admit that we prefer country areas. And we shall stick to them.
Busy cities (apart, of course, from London and Paris) do not really
interest us.
> For example, people warn of pickpockets and gypsy
>kids and the like in Rome -- would I stay away? Of course, not.
>With a money belt, there is no need to worry.
This is your choice: we have made ours.
Marie
--
Ma...@nodanw.demon.co.uk
jb
<Da...@nodanw.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> And we shall stick to them.
Maybe you should just stay where you are and not come to the U.S
period if this is the way you feel.
>Busy cities (apart, of course, from London and Paris) do not really
>interest us.
NYC is every bit as interesting----if not more---than London or Paris
either one. I have travelled to all of the above MANY times in my
life. I have been mugges and robbed in EVERY city you mention EXCEPT
New York!!!!!!!
>This is your choice: we have made ours.
>
And you are surely the looser in the situation.
John
David Gascon
>
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2001 11:31:48 -0800, lst...@NOSPAMdrizzle.com (LStrom)
> wrote:
>
> >
> >In that case, don't go to LA, Detroit, Chicago or Miami. Boston might be
> >okay though I had my wallet picked on the subway when I lived there. I
> >always felt safe there, anyway. Plan to carry your money and passport in
> >inside pockets or a neck pouch or a money belt all the same.
>
> If we all worried constantly about theft we
> would be in misery, but, on the other hand. taking some simple
> precautions can save a lot of loss and hassle. I have not
> carried a purse with anything of value in it when traveling since
> that experience.
And there you have it: New Yorker gets "religion" about purse-snatching
based on experience in Nebraska!
Nightjar
....
> i prefer top pocket of shirt , this is i reckon a safe zone, although
> whilst in an bangkok bar , a girl draped herself all over me , which i
> thought was great at the time, and later discovered that she had
> weedled some bills from out of my shirt pocket !
> whilst in the clinch !
The only pocket that is considered to be fairly safe from pickpockets is the
inside pocket of a close-fitting waistcoat, worn under a buttoned jacket. A
shirt pocket is not even safe in a crowd.
Colin Bignell
Nightjar
"David Lewis" <Da...@nodanw.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:49AZlAAX...@nodanw.com...
...
> When I go to London I behave just as I would in my home town.
London is where I was born and brought up and my view is that, if you do not
take even simple precautions against being robbed, then you have just been
lucky so far.
Colin Bignell
Nightjar
> Britain is seen as a soft touch by all kind s of criminals it seems.
.....
> Nigerian-born Victor Marquis, 23,
It is rather more likely that a Nigerian would target a country where
English is the main language.
Colin Bignell
Bernd Felsche
Pocket at the front of jeans is comparatively secure.
Jim Ley
>No. I live in New York City, which has its share of thieves, but
>I don't go about town with my passport or plane tickets.
So why do you in London?
Jim.
--
"Individuals have been able to talk nonsense
to an international audience as never before". BBC
devil
>
> Pocket at the front of jeans is comparatively secure.
And it security improves with tightness. And if in areas perceived as
unsafe, additionally, a hand in your pocket helps. This is where my
passport goes if on me.
anonymouse
>>>it a thin bag that you can tie it around your waist under your shirt.
>>>you can buy it in the shops selling suitcases. (maybe you can find it in
>>>some airport duty free shops)
>>Wearing a money belt/pouch makes travel so much more
>>relaxing -- not having to be concerned about pickpockets or
>>other theft. Don't leave home without one:)
>>
>
> Oh no? The money belt cult is back. Trying to convert us once more :-(.
>
> Not again @#%&&$#...
Hi,
I don't use the belt type... I use a THIN inside the shirt pouch... and
I don't use it all the time every day... but when traveling it's
comforting to know that my passport, return tickets, and real money/cc's
are save in the pouch.
and here's a tip... strip off all the extraneous flips and flaps on
eurail passes and airline tickets and you can cut their bulk in half.
Richard
and then just walking around with my hands in my pockets...
"Nightjar" <nigh...@insertmysurname.uk.com> wrote in message
news:6ZhT7.282$8%.183890@monolith.news.easynet.net...
Richard
off as well to get at my money belt, I think I'd notice..
"ching-ching" <b...@madasafish.com> wrote in message
news:efnm1u85lskl91s1j...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:22:44 GMT, Rita <nit...@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:05:36 GMT, mi...@dropmeglobalnet.co.uk (Mike)
> >wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >>Also watch out for the "young girl gangs" who try to get you into
> >>conversation, whilst the others crowd you .......dipping.
> >>--
> >Pickpockets present no threat if you wear a money belt,
> >and keep in that belt your plane tickets, passport, credit
> >cards and most of your cash. Why more travelers do not
> >protect their valuables in this way is one of life's little
> >mysteries. The money belt is worn under clothing, just
> >in case anyone wonders:)
>
> these expert gangs operate on the tube and other crowded places, when
> there is a scramble to get on the bus or tube you wont even know they
> have struck ! THIS IS WHEN YOU ARE MOST VULNERABLE.
>
> CCTV footage shown on TV shows that in a crowded place nobody is safe
> from pickpockets , no matter where you keep your valuables.
> However these gangs target laxadasical wealthy tourists in places like
> Portobello Road and oxford street ,etc ,they are too dumb to notice in
> most cases.
>
Richard
who refer to their padlocked closets as "safes" or small hotels that just
plainly don't have safes?
"sjoerd" <sjoerd...@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:3C1B0362...@xs4all.nl...
Nightjar
"Bernd Felsche" <ber...@innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:regkv9...@innovative.iinet.net.au...
Unless you have your hand in it all the time, like any outside pocket, it is
still vulnerable to a razor attack in a pressing crowd. A skilled razor
thief can remove a whole pocket patch without alerting the wearer.
Colin Bignell
David Gascon
A shirt pocket is not even safe when you bend down to pick something up
or tie your shoe in complete solitude!
David Gascon
>
> I've never had any problems keeping my wallet in my front pocket of my pants
> and then just walking around with my hands in my pockets...
>
But in some places, walking around with your hands in your pockets marks
you as a tourist, or worse. {;-)
David Lewis
<prop...@operamail.com> writes
>On Sun, 16 Dec 2001 17:33:11 +0000, David Lewis
><Da...@nodanw.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> And we shall stick to them.
>
>Maybe you should just stay where you are and not come to the U.S
>period if this is the way you feel.
>
>
Oh dear, oh dear.
>>Busy cities (apart, of course, from London and Paris) do not really
>>interest us.
>
>NYC is every bit as interesting----if not more---than London or Paris
>either one.
What total tosh. There are centuries of culture in European cities.
> I have travelled to all of the above MANY times in my
>life. I have been mugges and robbed in EVERY city you mention EXCEPT
>New York!!!!!!!
>
>
>>This is your choice: we have made ours.
>>
>
>And you are surely the looser in the situation.
I am not at all loose!
Marie
--
Ma...@nodanw.demon.co.uk
David Lewis
<nigh...@insertmysurname.uk.com> writes
But I will not resort to money belts.
David Lewis
>
>In that case, don't go to LA, Detroit, Chicago or Miami.
Ok. We won't. Except for the suburbs of LA where my brother in law
lives. He never locks his car and rarely his house. And there has been
one burglary in his street in 25 years.
>Boston might be
>okay though I had my wallet picked on the subway when I lived there. I
>always felt safe there, anyway. Plan to carry your money and passport in
>inside pockets or a neck pouch or a money belt all the same.
>
I shall carry my money in my handbag as I always do.
M.
David Lewis
<nit...@nyc.rr.com> writes
>If we all worried constantly about theft we
>would be in misery, but, on the other hand. taking some simple
>precautions can save a lot of loss and hassle. I have not
>carried a purse with anything of value in it when traveling since
>that experience.
I do not call that "taking simple precautions."
David Lewis
<b...@madasafish.com> writes
>i prefer top pocket of shirt , t
Not very good for ladies who are reasonably full figured.
--
David Lewis
postm...@nodanw.com
David Lewis
<nigh...@insertmysurname.uk.com> writes
>
Richard
breast-pocket usually empties all its contents onto the ground on its own!
"David Gascon" <gpad...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:3C1E4B53...@bigfoot.com...
Richard
Seriously. It'd be good to know if I ever end up in one of them.
Richard
"David Gascon" <gpad...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:3C1E4C3B...@bigfoot.com...
jb
Just stay at home honey.
John
On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 08:45:41 +0000, David Lewis
congokid
><Da...@nodanw.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> And we shall stick to them.
>And you are surely the looser in the situation.
Maybe the experience shook you up more than you imagined!?
--
congokid
Eating out in London? Read my tips...
http://congokid.com
Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)
Not front trouser pockets? I should think men would be even
more "sensitive" in that area than women, and I assure you,
I would be very much aware of anyone trying to insinuate a
hand into a front pants-pocket!
>
> Colin Bignell
Bernd Felsche
Front pockets in jeans aren't often "patches". They are separate
cloth pockets within the front of the trouser leg. Their position
and outline is not generally discernable from the outside.
A wallet isn't as obvious in the front trouser pocket. The angle of
attack is greatly reduced and the proximity of the hand is a
deterrent.
Paul Tauger
<snip>
> >NYC is every bit as interesting----if not more---than London or Paris
> >either one.
>
> What total tosh. There are centuries of culture in European cities.
There are centuries of culture in New York, as well. Amazing that yiou can
simply dismiss a city to which you've never been, and about which you
apparently know next to nothing.
> Marie
> --
> Ma...@nodanw.demon.co.uk
>
>
Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)
Paul Tauger wrote:
>
> There are centuries of culture in New York, as well. Amazing that yiou can
> simply dismiss a city to which you've never been, and about which you
> apparently know next to nothing.
New York (as Nieuw Amsterdam) was settled when? As early as
the late 1600's? Sorry, Mr. Tauger - New York's "culture"
cannot boast much more than three centuries, which is
nothing, compared to the thousand or so years of which many
European cities can boast! Some of the archaeological sites
in the Southwestern U.S. may be much older, but the culture
had disappeared long before the white man arrived on these
shores.
Nightjar
None of which changes the fact that, in a pressing crowd - i.e. where a
crowd is pressed close together, for example on public transport - any
outside pocket is fair game to a razor thief. As a jeans wearer, I do know
what the front pockets are like, but mentioned patch pocket as an example of
the level of skill available. However, if you wish to continue to believe
that a front jeans pocket is safe, you are not that likely to be proven
wrong - skilled razor thieves are much rarer than the distraction
pickpocket.
Colin Bignell
jb
<tauger...@SPAMusa.net> wrote:
>There are centuries of culture in New York, as well. Amazing that yiou can
>simply dismiss a city to which you've never been, and about which you
>apparently know next to nothing.
>
Indeed true !!
Guess one must just consider the source when responding to such
idiotic postings as made by the originator of this.
Not you, Paul.....:)
John
Paul Tauger
"Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3C1EE648...@earthlink.net...
You have a very peculiar definition of "culture."
Richard
last I checked, three (the number of centuries NYC has been around for) was
still greater than one, so he was right in using the plural of word
"century."
Either way, so what if NYC isn't as old as London or Paris? You've been
talking about *culture* - which I assure you has changed so much in both
London and Paris since the times prior to New York's existance that their
present-day cultures more closely resemble that of present-day NYC than that
of 16th Century Europe.
Now if you want to talk history, sure Europe has far more to offer. Then
again if you travel only to see history of a country, you're missing out on
so very much.
Richard
"Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)" <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3C1EE648...@earthlink.net...
>
>
Nightjar
While that is true, few towns have similar levels of street crime to that
found in the larger cities.
Colin Bignell
David Lewis
<prop...@operamail.com> writes
>God what a damned idiot writing this crap..........
>
>Just stay at home honey.
>
>
>John
I would appreciate your not being so "friendly" with me. I do not
appreciate being called "honey" in that disparaging way.
We shall, of course, do exactly what *we* want to do.
M
--
David Lewis
postm...@nodanw.com
David Lewis
Paul Tauger <tauger...@SPAMusa.net> writes
>There are centuries of culture in New York, as well.
How many, exactly? As many as, for instance, in Rome?
Paul Tauger
> In article <CKzT7.10285$O7.11...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> Paul Tauger <tauger...@SPAMusa.net> writes
> >There are centuries of culture in New York, as well.
>
> How many, exactly? As many as, for instance, in Rome?
No, but you're getting far off topic. Street crime, specifically
pickpockets, is far worse in Rome than in New York.
Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at which
you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the cultural
equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it as a
world cultural center.
If you think "culture" is a synonym for age, then I expect that you would
find Olduvai Gorge in Africa to be the cultural sine qua non.
David Lewis
<tauge...@usa.net> writes
>Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at which
>you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the cultural
>equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
>restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it as a
>world cultural center.
>
>If you think "culture" is a synonym for age, then I expect that you would
>find Olduvai Gorge in Africa to be the cultural sine qua non.
But 'twas thee that quoted "centuries" of culture!
However, in terms of antiquity of buildings, etc, churches, castles and
stately homes, quantity of opera houses (one in every town, almost, in
Germany - and I mean opera houses where grand opera is almost always in
repertoire), musees d'art, no city in the north eastern USA can honestly
compare with the sheer breadth and quantity to be found in Europe. That
is a fact.
Were we to vsit New York, it would be for cheap shopping rather than
culture. But we ain't about to visit: we have been warned how careful
we would have to be, with money belts, etc.
We shall stick to rural Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana, to the West
Coast, which we have travelled from Oregon to LA, to rural New England
and so on.
We only have 4 weeks a year to visit: there are plenty of small towns
and rural communities without going to big cities.
And before you pick me up on it, we have not visited down town (quaint
expression) LA - only the suburbs where my brother in law lives.
M
Paul Tauger
> In article <9vo54a$g3b77$1...@ID-101118.news.dfncis.de>, Paul Tauger
> <tauge...@usa.net> writes
> >Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at which
> >you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the cultural
> >equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
> >restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it as
a
> >world cultural center.
> >
> >If you think "culture" is a synonym for age, then I expect that you would
> >find Olduvai Gorge in Africa to be the cultural sine qua non.
>
>
> But 'twas thee that quoted "centuries" of culture!
No, it was not. Here's the original exchange:
>> >NYC is every bit as interesting----if not more---than London or Paris
>> >either one.
>
>> What total tosh. There are centuries of culture in European cities.
>There are centuries of culture in New York, as well. >Amazing that yiou
can simply dismiss a city to which >you've never been, and about which you
>apparently know next to nothing.
New York may have the word "New" in its name, but it has been around since
the 1600s.
>
> However, in terms of antiquity of buildings, etc, churches, castles and
> stately homes, quantity of opera houses (one in every town, almost, in
> Germany - and I mean opera houses where grand opera is almost always in
> repertoire), musees d'art, no city in the north eastern USA can honestly
> compare with the sheer breadth and quantity to be found in Europe. That
> is a fact.
First of all, the comparison was between New York, London and Paris, not the
U.S. and Europe.
New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art has a collection which is, for all
intents and purposes, unrivaled. My particular interest happens to be
Impressionism. The Met's collection is superior to, for example, that of
the Musee D'Orsay (which is a great museum -- don't get me wrong). The
Louvre's collection is, not surprisingly, very heavily slanted towards
French painters -- though the Met has a lot of American artists, it has a
better representation of world painters than the latter. Incidently, if you
want to Seurat's Sunday on the Island of the Grand Jatte (sp?), you'll need
to go Chicago and see it at the wonderful Art Institute.
New York's Museum of Modern Art, while not as physically large as the New
Tate in London, has a less "radical" collection.
The British Museum is, IIRC, Victorian and, as such, a contemporary of New
York's Museum of Natural History. From what I've seen, both collections
compare favorably.
Let's see . . . theater?
The West End seems awfully fond of American musicals. Of course, Andrew
Lloyd Webber's Really Useful Theater company is based in Britain, I'll give
you that (though I'll take anything by Sondheim over "Cats"), provided that
you remember that musical theater is a purely American invention.
Of course, RADA is one of the great theater schools . . . as is Julliard.
I'm sure you're familiar with the Metropolitan Opera. I've attended operas
at the Met, as well as at La Scala. Both are, of course, world class,
though the production values seemed to me somewhat more in New York --
perhaps it was just the designers.
How about ballet? The Paris Ballet at the L'Opera Garnier is wonderful, but
I can name at least five New York companies that are just as good.
Are you going to suggest that the London Philharmonic is "better" than the
New York Philharmonic? They're both world-class orchestras. Period.
Shall we discuss universities? You'll have to help me there, as I'm only
familiar with the University of London and the Sorbonne (Oxford and
Cambridge are not in London, but if you want to include them, I'll cite
Harvard and Yale). New York has New York University, City University,
Fordham University, Johns Hopkins University and Columbia University (and
Rutgers University is right across the river), and more colleges than I can
recall at the moment (Lehman, Barnard, Hunter, John Jay are the ones that
immediately come to mind).
"Antiquity of buildings"? I'm not sure how that is a measure of "culture,"
but, yes, there are buildings in London and Paris that are older than the
oldest in New York. However, the vast majority of buildings in both cities
are no older than New York's oldest.
>
> Were we to vsit New York, it would be for cheap shopping rather than
> culture.
Where in the world do you live that you would consider New York "cheap
shopping"? I can't think of anywhere in Europe that I've been, at least in
the last 5 or 6 years, that was more expensive than New York (and that
specifically includes London).
However, your statement betrays a certain snobbery or, at best, a
considerable ignorance of New York. I don't think of New York as "better"
than Paris, or of Paris as "better" than London. Each city has its own
character which makes them desireable destinations.
> But we ain't about to visit: we have been warned how careful
> we would have to be, with money belts, etc.
What a remarkably stupid thing to say.
I lived the first 20 years of my life in New York, and have visited at last
yearly for nearly three decades since. I've never had the least problem,
and I don't use money belts, etc. when I visit. I've also visited London,
Paris, Rome and countless other cities in Europe many, many times and have
had no problems there, either (except once, in Milan, when I encountered a
group of child pickpockets who were easily dealt with). If you read this ng
with any regularity, you will find many, many more postings about
pickpockets and street crime in Europe then you will find in rec.travel.usa
about such things in the U.S. I don't let those posting dissuade me from
travelling anywhere in Europe.
If you truly think New York is so dangerous that you can't visit, then I
would respectfully suggest that your belief is more a reflection of your
cultural bigotry than any legitimate concern. You probably wouldn't enjoy
your visit to the U.S. anyway, given that we have no culture here at all, as
all of our cities were built so recently, and you'll only be able to dine on
McDonalds and be entertained by common situtation comedies on television.
>
> We shall stick to rural Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana, to the West
> Coast, which we have travelled from Oregon to LA, to rural New England
> and so on.
You've been to LA and you think New York is dangerous? Next time you're in
LA, be sure to ask someone what happened at the corner of Florence and
Manchester.
> We only have 4 weeks a year to visit: there are plenty of small towns
> and rural communities without going to big cities.
As opposed to LA?
Fine, come only to look at the cows, if that's what you like. However,
don't pretend, for one moment, that you have the slightest understanding of
the U.S., its people and its culture. Fortunately, most people that I know
are not so closed minded when they travel abroad.
>
> And before you pick me up on it, we have not visited down town (quaint
> expression) LA - only the suburbs where my brother in law lives.
All you've done is demonstrate your ignorance of yet another U.S. city.
"Downtown LA" is, for the most part, merely a collection of office
buildings, and is virtually abandoned in the evening and on weekends (the
Music Center, on the northern edge of downtown, is the primary exception).
LA has no "suburbs," per se, but, rather, is composed of many small cities
which, taken as a whole, constitute "Greater Los Angeles." Beverly Hills is
a separate city, though part of Los Angeles county, as is Pasadena and Santa
Monica. West Los Angeles is part of the City of Los Angeles, but relatively
far from downtown (and home to the Getty Art Museum).
>
>
> M
>
David Lewis
<tauge...@usa.net> writes
>
(entire long and inappropriate message cut)
We all know Paul Tauger of old.
If I waste my time in replying, it will be by email.
I shall neither wrire nor read anything else on this thead.
You must all be royally bored by it.
M.
Paul Tauger
> In article <9voegi$fpj7u$1...@ID-101118.news.dfncis.de>, Paul Tauger
> <tauge...@usa.net> writes
> >
>
> (entire long and inappropriate message cut)
>
> We all know Paul Tauger of old.
>
> If I waste my time in replying, it will be by email.
Please don't email me.
Go Fig
"Paul Tauger" <tauge...@usa.net> wrote:
Too funny and sadly exactly to the point for her level of sophistication.
Many of these pillars of 'culture' she makes reference too... the
Churches... cant even support themselves and the State must supplement
their existence... doesnt seem to be a big demand for this type of
culture anymore... they do seem to buy a lot of Brittany Spears
though....
jay
Tue, Dec 18, 2001
mailto:go...@mac.com
>
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
Bernd Felsche
>The British Museum is, IIRC, Victorian and, as such, a contemporary of New
>York's Museum of Natural History. From what I've seen, both collections
>compare favorably.
Not in the least. The BM is filled with original plunder. NYMNH
doesn't have the benefit of Empire. :-)
>"Antiquity of buildings"? I'm not sure how that is a measure of
>"culture," but, yes, there are buildings in London and Paris that
>are older than the oldest in New York. However, the vast majority
>of buildings in both cities are no older than New York's oldest.
London is a "new city" by European standards.
>If you truly think New York is so dangerous that you can't visit,
>then I would respectfully suggest that your belief is more a
>reflection of your cultural bigotry than any legitimate concern.
Perhaps it's a product of the "culture" exported from the USA.
That shapes prejudice as much as anything.
You can't all be as thick as Al Bundy. :-)
And very few poms fit their cultural stereotypes.
Go Fig
Bernd Felsche <ber...@innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:
Tell me what first run movies are playing in your town tonight ?
Are these movies free or is there an admission charge ?
jay
Tue, Dec 18, 2001
mailto:go...@mac.com
>
> You can't all be as thick as Al Bundy. :-)
> And very few poms fit their cultural stereotypes.
--
David Gascon
>
> In article <9vo54a$g3b77$1...@ID-101118.news.dfncis.de>,
> "Paul Tauger" <tauge...@usa.net> wrote:
>
> > "David Lewis" <Da...@nodanw.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:RYbDcKA6...@nodanw.com...
> > > In article <CKzT7.10285$O7.11...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> > > Paul Tauger <tauger...@SPAMusa.net> writes
> > > >There are centuries of culture in New York, as well.
> > >
> > > How many, exactly? As many as, for instance, in Rome?
> >
> > No, but you're getting far off topic. Street crime, specifically
> > pickpockets, is far worse in Rome than in New York.
> >
> > Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at which
> > you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the cultural
> > equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
> > restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it as a
> > world cultural center.
> >
> > If you think "culture" is a synonym for age, then I expect that you would
> > find Olduvai Gorge in Africa to be the cultural sine qua non.
> >
> Too funny and sadly exactly to the point for her level of sophistication.
>
> Many of these pillars of 'culture' she makes reference too... the
> Churches... cant even support themselves and the State must supplement
> their existence... doesnt seem to be a big demand for this type of
> culture anymore... they do seem to buy a lot of Brittany Spears
> though....
>
So, culture = what's selling lately?
Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)
Rita wrote:
>
>
> New York's attractions are not that it possesses great
> historical depth, I'll grant you. But if one is looking for "culture"
> in the sense of art, music, theater, museums of various kinds
> and such, it is a world class repository. Which is one of the
> reasons I chose to come here to live 20 some years ago.
> I think, given particular circumstances, I also could happily
> live in London or Paris.
Oh, about that you'll get no argument from me! (Although,
if I had my 'druthers, I'd settle in Vienna.)
charles hobbs
>
> You've been to LA and you think New York is dangerous? Next time you're in
> LA, be sure to ask someone what happened at the corner of Florence and
> Manchester.
Uhh...that's in Inglewood (an "inner-city suburb", not LA proper
(although not the greatest part of the area either!)
You're probably thinking of Florence and *Normandie*, where the 1992 riot
started. But that's not a place most LA *residents*, let alone a tourist, would
think of visiting.
But of course there's rough parts of any metro area, US, Europe or anywhere
else.
However:
* many of these places are not where "average" tourists normally go.
* the usual alertness, "big city precautions", etc. should protect you against
most petty crimes (pickpockets, etc).
* If you or anyone have a concern about any neighborhood in a big city, ask in
the appropriate newsgroup.
On my trips, (New York and Chicago in 2000, and London, Paris and San Juan PR
this year), I didn't have a problem anywhere. Oh, there was a bum in every
doorway
in the Chicago Loop, it seemed, and a few annoying beggars in London, but that
didn't ruin my trip. Heck, I rode the bus through the south side of Chicago, and
I had
no problems even there!
>
> All you've done is demonstrate your ignorance of yet another U.S. city.
> "Downtown LA" is, for the most part, merely a collection of office
> buildings, and is virtually abandoned in the evening and on weekends (the
> Music Center, on the northern edge of downtown, is the primary exception).
Also Olvera St/Chinatown area, and possibly near the Library. Downtown LA
is picking up some, but it's not quite Manhattan...Most of the "conventional"
attractions,
nightlife, etc is spread around the area.
Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)
Paul Tauger wrote:
>
> Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at which
> you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the cultural
> equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
> restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it as a
> world cultural center.
*A* world cultural center, yes - but certainly not the ONLY
world cultural center. And "culture" in America is still
too self-conscious. Few American attend "cultural" events
without being aware that is what they are doing. In Europe
they are so much a part of "normal" life that people don't
think twice about whether they're "culture" or not - they
are just something one does for enjoyment.
>
> If you think "culture" is a synonym for age, then I expect that you would
> find Olduvai Gorge in Africa to be the cultural sine qua non.
If you think "culture" is a modern invention, perhaps you
have not studied quite ENOUGH history! Most of American
"culture" was imported from Europe. It's true we have
adapted some of it in unique ways - but "the arts" are a
living, growing force, to which each culture (as in
"civilization") contributes its share.
Opera, for instance, began as an attempt to reconstruct what
was known of ancient Greek drama. Literature owes debts to
Greek and Roman writers, as well as those of other cultures
who preceded them. Sculpture and painting and the visual
arts date back even earlier. Are you saying that's NOT
"culture"? That only comparatively modern versions of such
qualify? Each county's "culture" (in the sense you are
apparently using it) grows out of that country's history -
you cannot have "modern" art, music, literature, etc.
without acknowledging its roots in the past (and, at least
in the so-called "Western" world, those roots are in Europe,
not New York City).
Don't misunderstand me, I LIKE New York - but it is not the
worlds ONLY center of culture, nor even necessarily the
best, although I grant you it ranks among them.
Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)
David Lewis wrote:
>
>
> Were we to vsit New York, it would be for cheap shopping rather than
> culture. But we ain't about to visit: we have been warned how careful
> we would have to be, with money belts, etc.
If you like opera and museums, You really SHOULD visit it.
But forget "cheap" shopping - you're better off doing that
in L.A., which doesn't seem to be QUITE as expensive as New
York. Although if you're British, it might seem so - I
thought London was VERY expensive, since things cost in
British pounds, the same as they would in US dollars, here.
(That is, what I'd pay $5 for, here, I'd pay £5 for in
London, although the pound was worth about $1.55.)
> And before you pick me up on it, we have not visited down town (quaint
> expression) LA - only the suburbs where my brother in law lives.
Aside from the Music Center and a couple of fairly new
museums, there ain't much to see - it's mostly (non-retail)
businesses and attorneys' offices!
>
> M
Go Fig
David Gascon <gpad...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
Not exclusively... but it is a very good indication.
jay
Wed, Dec 19, 2001
charles hobbs
> David Lewis wrote:
> >
> >
> > Were we to vsit New York, it would be for cheap shopping rather than
> > culture. But we ain't about to visit: we have been warned how careful
> > we would have to be, with money belts, etc.
I didn't wear a money belt in New York (probably should have...but used an
inside vest pocket like I usually do at home in LA).
I used a money belt in Europe, but mostly to carry my *passport* (in case
some official
needed to see it). But I still had my regular wallet, with the day's cash in
the usual
place.
>
>
> If you like opera and museums, You really SHOULD visit it.
> But forget "cheap" shopping - you're better off doing that
> in L.A., which doesn't seem to be QUITE as expensive as New
> York.
Wouldn't the higher airfare to LA from England offset the price advantage?
Of course, a lot of high prices in Europe might be tax. Here on the West
Coast of the US, and in Hawaii, we get a lot of Japanese tourists who come
here for, among other things, cheap shopping. (Or did--since they have had a
recession for a couple of years, I haven't seen as many).
> Although if you're British, it might seem so - I
> thought London was VERY expensive, since things cost in
> British pounds, the same as they would in US dollars, here.
> (That is, what I'd pay $5 for, here, I'd pay £5 for in
> London, although the pound was worth about $1.55.)
>
I noticed that too. A fast food meal that cost $2 in the US would be
£2 in London...not that because it was necessarily worth more or
cost more to ship/produce, but because it was probably easier for
the people doing the pricing to deal with unit pounds. Of course since
the pound is worth 50% more than the dollar, we USians will pay more...
jb
<Da...@nodanw.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>We shall, of course, do exactly what *we* want to do.
>
Well, we all do that don't we honey?
John
Paul Tauger
> Paul Tauger wrote:
> >
>
> > Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at which
> > you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the cultural
> > equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
> > restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it as a
> > world cultural center.
>
> *A* world cultural center, yes - but certainly not the ONLY
> world cultural center.
I never suggested it was the only world cultural center.
> And "culture" in America is still
> too self-conscious.
What in the world is that supposed to mean?
> Few American attend "cultural" events
> without being aware that is what they are doing.
As opposed to attending accidently? I think I understand what you are
saying, and it is utter nonsense. I don't know anyone, repeat,
ANYONE, who attends theater, opera, ballet or museums saying, "Well,
golly! Look at me! I'm actually at the o-pa-ruh!"
> In Europe
> they are so much a part of "normal" life that people don't
> think twice about whether they're "culture" or not - they
> are just something one does for enjoyment.
In America, they are so much a part of "normal" life that people don't
think twice about whether they're "culture or not - they are just
something one does for enjoyment.
>
> >
> > If you think "culture" is a synonym for age, then I expect that you would
> > find Olduvai Gorge in Africa to be the cultural sine qua non.
>
> If you think "culture" is a modern invention, perhaps you
> have not studied quite ENOUGH history!
Read carefully what I wrote. You seem to have a chronic problem
attributing to me opinions I do not hold and have never voiced.
Perhaps you have not studied quite ENOUGH reading.
> Most of American
> "culture" was imported from Europe.
And most of European culture was imported from Byzantium. So what?
> It's true we have
> adapted some of it in unique ways - but "the arts" are a
> living, growing force, to which each culture (as in
> "civilization") contributes its share.
And you believe that America hasn't contributed its share?
>
> Opera, for instance, began as an attempt to reconstruct what
> was known of ancient Greek drama.
And the impetus to do so was a direct result of the fall of Byzantium,
otherwise known as the Renaissance. Do you think opera is the
exclusive province of the Italians?
> Literature owes debts to
> Greek and Roman writers, as well as those of other cultures
> who preceded them.
Really! Shakespeare borrowed from Hollingshead, not Gilgamesh. But
again, so what?
> Sculpture and painting and the visual
> arts date back even earlier. Are you saying that's NOT
> "culture"?
Of course not. Please look up Olduvai Gorge somewhere, so that you
will understand the reference.
> That only comparatively modern versions of such
> qualify?
Evelyn, re-read my posts. I never even intimated such a thing.
> Each county's "culture" (in the sense you are
> apparently using it) grows out of that country's history -
Evidently, you have no conception of how I'm using the term.
> you cannot have "modern" art, music, literature, etc.
> without acknowledging its roots in the past (and, at least
> in the so-called "Western" world, those roots are in Europe,
> not New York City).
I don't limit "culture" to "modern" anything. However, this thread is
not about the origins of western culture, but whether the cultural
life of New York is comparable to that of the great cities of Europe.
Anyone who has ever visited New York knows that it is.
>
> Don't misunderstand me, I LIKE New York - but it is not the
> worlds ONLY center of culture, nor even necessarily the
> best, although I grant you it ranks among them.
Which was my only point.
Sheesh.
grey
<evg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Paul Tauger wrote:
>>
>> Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at which
>> you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the cultural
>> equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
>> restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it as a
>> world cultural center.
There's a big difference between what you see in the US and in Europe,
in my opinion. In the US, "culture" is utterly fragmented; there are
no cultural traditions stretching back that bring things together or
that you can draw from. No literary traditions worth mentioning, IMO.
Music? Nothing i can see besides screaming pop music. Art? If you
have five American artists, you have five different "schools," and
it's nearly all silly stuff supported by gov't grants or elitist
institutions that is presented without context--a few lines here and
there, "colorfields", and so on. And much of it tries to scream just
like an ad to draw attention to itself (I don't need art to be
representational, but contextless in-joke art of low caliber just
doesn't interest me). Same with so many plays. Sorry, I don't count
restaurants and shopping as major cultural assets.
Culture? I wish it were different, but in the US I find it fragmented,
out of context, and nearly always just plain uninteresting, IMO, and I
say that from year after year of disappointment. European traditions
stretch back hundreds of years in art and literature, and although you
can see much of the same contemporary trash in Europe now, there are
always those traditions to draw from, to build on, and to give
coherence.
No, this is not an attack on the US, no need to get super defensive;
what I'm saying is that in MY OPINION, the cultural traditions and
contexts of Europe make all the difference TO ME. I find "culture" in
the US fragmented, often offensive (it's so political that it works
hard to be politically correct more often than not), and without
coherence. And I also find it inaccessible--"schools" change every
fifteen minutes (as in fifteen minutes of fame); it's become simply a
spectator sport. I'd rather get involved, both in writing and the
plastic arts. When you have a tradition to build on, even modest
artists can go fairly high; when everyone starts from the ground up
each and every time, you don't get very far from the ground. Which is
why art ends up screaming to attract attention to itself; insecure
traditions always do.
The culture in the US is based on consumerism--movies, books, TV, even
(and very much so) art. How many even vaguely interesting art movies
have you seen in the US in recent years? How many art movies period?
Movies, magazines, TV, are all purposely and consciously aimed at
18-26 year olds, because they buy stuff. And the result is simply
adolescent. Thirty years ago, adults went to movies in the US. Today?
The equation has changed. Same with magazines, books, TV, etc. Where's
the shared art, music, or literature between generations? What
cultural ground is being handed down?
Look, your mileage may vary, this is all my opinion. I'm an American
citizen, so don't just take this as a wanton attack on US culture from
outside. And I wish things were different. But there simply aren't the
cultural traditions you see in Europe in the US. Maybe one day the
tide will turn away from that consumerism which seems to inform every
aspect of US life, but I'll have to see it to believe it. Consumerism
is not the culture I look for.
With apologies to the group; I know this is OT.
Richard
news:qff12uc75fs80ktv2...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 05:24:31 GMT, "Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)"
> <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >Paul Tauger wrote:
> >>
> >> Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at
which
> >> you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the
cultural
> >> equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
> >> restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it
as a
> >> world cultural center.
>
> There's a big difference between what you see in the US and in Europe,
> in my opinion. In the US, "culture" is utterly fragmented; there are
> no cultural traditions stretching back that bring things together or
> that you can draw from. No literary traditions worth mentioning, IMO.
> Music? Nothing i can see besides screaming pop music. Art? If you
Nothing but screaming pop? Try to go beyond what the media incessantly
shoves in front of your face and take a look at what else there is out
there. Try jazz to start with - it's neither screaming nor is it pop. Then
move onto some blues, perhaps.
There's plenty of "screaming pop" coming from within Europe as well. Sure
the US has produced the likes of Britney Spears and the Backstreet Boys but
Europe - the UK in particular - is responsible for the Spice Girls, among
others.
<snip>
Richard
Go Fig
grey <n...@available.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 05:24:31 GMT, "Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)"
> <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >Paul Tauger wrote:
> >>
> >> Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at which
> >> you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the cultural
> >> equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
> >> restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it as a
> >> world cultural center.
>
> There's a big difference between what you see in the US and in Europe,
> in my opinion. In the US, "culture" is utterly fragmented; there are
> no cultural traditions stretching back that bring things together or
> that you can draw from. No literary traditions worth mentioning, IMO.
Hmm... why is it then that Europe gobbled up the writings of the 1840s
by Mark Twain and Morton in tgheir Wild West journeys.
I believe that Mark Twain was, in fact, the MOST prolific of his
time.... world wide... not a bad legacy.
> Music? Nothing i can see besides screaming pop music.
I agree... but that is why I would prefer to judge its merit, when
possible, by demand... measured in money. The demand is strong.
> Art? If you have five American artists, you have five different "schools,"
I can think of at least 3 new 'schools' that came from the
renaissance... would you have been discounting them too, at the time ?
> and it's nearly all silly stuff supported by gov't grants or elitist
> institutions that is presented without context--a few lines here and
> there, "colorfields", and so on. And much of it tries to scream just
> like an ad to draw attention to itself (I don't need art to be
> representational, but contextless in-joke art of low caliber just
> doesn't interest me).
Its in "the eye of the beholder'
> Same with so many plays.
When I look at my 'London Planner" the biggest ads seem to be devoted to
plays that originated on NYCs Broadway... again, the demand seems to be
there.
> Sorry, I don't count
> restaurants and shopping as major cultural assets.
>
> Culture? I wish it were different, but in the US I find it fragmented,
The U.S. is the most diverse society in the world... Immigrants from
throughout the world... this is her best asset not a liability.
> out of context, and nearly always just plain uninteresting, IMO, and I
> say that from year after year of disappointment. European traditions
> stretch back hundreds of years in art and literature, and although you
> can see much of the same contemporary trash in Europe now, there are
> always those traditions to draw from, to build on, and to give
> coherence.
>
> No, this is not an attack on the US, no need to get super defensive;
> what I'm saying is that in MY OPINION, the cultural traditions and
> contexts of Europe make all the difference TO ME. I find "culture" in
> the US fragmented, often offensive (it's so political that it works
> hard to be politically correct more often than not), and without
> coherence. And I also find it inaccessible--"schools" change every
> fifteen minutes (as in fifteen minutes of fame); it's become simply a
> spectator sport. I'd rather get involved, both in writing and the
> plastic arts. When you have a tradition to build on, even modest
> artists can go fairly high; when everyone starts from the ground up
> each and every time, you don't get very far from the ground. Which is
> why art ends up screaming to attract attention to itself; insecure
> traditions always do.
"art' is only a part of culture... where did Jazz come from ?
>
> The culture in the US is based on consumerism--movies, books, TV, even
> (and very much so) art. How many even vaguely interesting art movies
> have you seen in the US in recent years? How many art movies period?
Hmmm... in terms of 'art' movies... isnt the Sundance film festival one
of the most revered film festivals in the world for 'art' movies... they
also have a TV station that shows these films to millions of house-holds
in the U.S..
> Movies, magazines, TV, are all purposely and consciously aimed at
> 18-26 year olds, because they buy stuff. And the result is simply
> adolescent. Thirty years ago, adults went to movies in the US. Today?
> The equation has changed. Same with magazines, books, TV, etc. Where's
> the shared art, music, or literature between generations? What
> cultural ground is being handed down?
One that people the world over are willing to spend there hard earned
money on.
>
> Look, your mileage may vary, this is all my opinion. I'm an American
> citizen, so don't just take this as a wanton attack on US culture from
> outside. And I wish things were different. But there simply aren't the
> cultural traditions you see in Europe in the US. Maybe one day the
> tide will turn away from that consumerism which seems to inform every
> aspect of US life, but I'll have to see it to believe it. Consumerism
> is not the culture I look for.
Then how would you measure demand ? Some elite telling us what is 'good'
jay
Wed, Dec 19, 2001
mailto:go...@mac.com
>
> With apologies to the group; I know this is OT.
--
Paul Tauger
"Richard" <n...@available.com> wrote in message
news:9vqjoa$ppc$1...@dns3.cae.ca...
> "grey" <n...@available.com> wrote in message
> news:qff12uc75fs80ktv2...@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 05:24:31 GMT, "Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)"
> > <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > >Paul Tauger wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at
> which
> > >> you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the
> cultural
> > >> equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
> > >> restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish
it
> as a
> > >> world cultural center.
> >
> > There's a big difference between what you see in the US and in Europe,
> > in my opinion. In the US, "culture" is utterly fragmented; there are
> > no cultural traditions stretching back that bring things together or
> > that you can draw from. No literary traditions worth mentioning, IMO.
> > Music? Nothing i can see besides screaming pop music. Art? If you
>
> Nothing but screaming pop? Try to go beyond what the media incessantly
> shoves in front of your face and take a look at what else there is out
> there. Try jazz to start with - it's neither screaming nor is it pop. Then
> move onto some blues, perhaps.
Thanks for pointing out blues and jazz -- both of which are PURELY American
musical forms. I had forgotten about them in my own response.
Paul Tauger
> <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >Paul Tauger wrote:
> >>
> >> Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at
which
> >> you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the
cultural
> >> equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
> >> restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it
as a
> >> world cultural center.
>
> There's a big difference between what you see in the US and in Europe,
> in my opinion. In the US, "culture" is utterly fragmented; there are
> no cultural traditions stretching back that bring things together or
> that you can draw from.
This is so opaque as to defy understanding. Americans, who are all the
descendents of immigrants, observe the cultural traditions of their
ancestors, as well as those of more recent vintage.
> No literary traditions worth mentioning, IMO.
Mark Twain, John Irving, Arthur Miller, Edward Albee, O'Henry, Thoreau,
Eugene O'Neill, Tennessee Williams, Truman Capote, Eudora Welty, Nathaniel
Hawthorne . . .
Shall I go on?
> Music? Nothing i can see besides screaming pop music.
Then change the channel. Virtually every city of any size has at least one
opera company and one symphony orchestra. Musical theater was invented
here. Julliard and the Boston Conservatory are world-class conservatories.
> Art? If you
> have five American artists, you have five different "schools,"
For example? Off the top of my head, I can think of only two true
"schools" -- American Primitive and the so-called "Trash Can" School.
However, there were numerous significant Americans painting in other
schools, including Impressionism, Surrealism and post-Modernism.
Unfortunately, my knowledge of art doesn't include earlier periods, but I
doubt that paint and paintbrushes were only introduced to the U.S. in 1880
or so.
> and
> it's nearly all silly stuff supported by gov't grants or elitist
> institutions that is presented without context
Sorry but you haven't a clue what you're talking about. Perhaps if your
knowledge of American art were based on what you viewed in galleries and
museums, instead of what you read in the more sensationalistic press, you'd
have a better understanding of the scope of American art.
>--a few lines here and
> there, "colorfields", and so on. And much of it tries to scream just
> like an ad to draw attention to itself (I don't need art to be
> representational, but contextless in-joke art of low caliber just
> doesn't interest me). Same with so many plays.
Which plays would those be? You mean plays by Williams and O'Neill? Albee
and Kopit? Lanford Wilson? LeRoi Jones (aka Baraka)?
Have you even read any of these, much less seen them? Clearly, you don't
know the first thing about American theater.
>Sorry, I don't count
> restaurants and shopping as major cultural assets.
Neither do I.
>
> Culture? I wish it were different, but in the US I find it fragmented,
> out of context, and nearly always just plain uninteresting, IMO,
Fortunately, your apparently not-too-well-informed-O doesn't determine the
scope of cultural activity in the U.S.
> and I
> say that from year after year of disappointment.
Perhaps your preconceptions inform your attitude? Would you like some
recommendations?
>European traditions
> stretch back hundreds of years in art and literature, and although you
> can see much of the same contemporary trash in Europe now, there are
> always those traditions to draw from, to build on, and to give
> coherence.
And what makes you think that those same traditions haven't, and do not,
influence American art and literature? First of all, you're making the
mistake of assuming that "_western_ traditions" is a synonym for "European
traditions" -- it is not.
>
> No, this is not an attack on the US, no need to get super defensive;
No, just an attack on reality. I'm not defensive -- just appalled at the
apparent lack of familiarity with America's cultural base.
> what I'm saying is that in MY OPINION, the cultural traditions and
> contexts of Europe make all the difference TO ME. I find "culture" in
> the US fragmented, often offensive (it's so political that it works
> hard to be politically correct more often than not),
Utter nonsense. What you've written is typical of the opinion of certain
pop-media icons, but hardly typical of the state of the arts in the U.S.
and without
> coherence. And I also find it inaccessible--"schools" change every
> fifteen minutes (as in fifteen minutes of fame); it's become simply a
> spectator sport. I'd rather get involved, both in writing and the
> plastic arts. When you have a tradition to build on, even modest
> artists can go fairly high; when everyone starts from the ground up
> each and every time, you don't get very far from the ground. Which is
> why art ends up screaming to attract attention to itself; insecure
> traditions always do.
>
> The culture in the US is based on consumerism--movies, books, TV, even
> (and very much so) art.
Clearly, there's no point in responding to you any further. It is said that
your education, so as it is, was so deficient as to leave you with this kind
of a shallow, ill-informed understanding of the U.S.
> How many even vaguely interesting art movies
> have you seen in the US in recent years?
Depends on how you define "art movies." Answer: quite a few.
>How many art movies period?
A couple of dozen a year. Have you seen Pollack? The Big Dinner?
Didn't think so.
> Movies, magazines, TV, are all purposely and consciously aimed at
> 18-26 year olds, because they buy stuff. And the result is simply
> adolescent. Thirty years ago, adults went to movies in the US. Today?
> The equation has changed. Same with magazines, books, TV, etc. Where's
> the shared art, music, or literature between generations? What
> cultural ground is being handed down?
>
> Look, your mileage may vary, this is all my opinion. I'm an American
> citizen,
>so don't just take this as a wanton attack on US culture from
> outside.
All the more reason you should be ashamed of yourself for knowing so little
about the cultural life of this country.
Jeroen Coolsaet
>In article <qff12uc75fs80ktv2...@4ax.com>,
> grey <n...@available.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Culture? I wish it were different, but in the US I find it fragmented,
>
>The U.S. is the most diverse society in the world... Immigrants from
>throughout the world... this is her best asset not a liability.
WRONG. AFAIK, Belgium is way more diverse than any state in the USA
(or even the USA alltogether). Every existing country that is
recognized worldwide has an embassy in Belgium. It is the site of many
of the most important international Agencies (EU, NATO, SWIFT,...) and
in se produces many international visitors. Due to our relatively
small size (only the inhabitants of the city of New York), we have a
greater mixture.
Above, we speak many languages (at least, we can read many languages,
i won't say that my writing is that good, but i haven't got any
problems with reading French, Dutch, English, German, (some) Spanish,
(some) Italian, (some) Latin. I don't think that many American
citizens can say they understand that many languages.
(and no, i'm not a 66 year old man who studied languages. I'm 22 and
studying Economics)
>
>
>"art' is only a part of culture... where did Jazz come from ?
(partly) Belgium, the inventor of the Saxophone was Adolphe Sax, a
Belgian citizen.
>
>
>>
>> The culture in the US is based on consumerism--movies, books, TV, even
>> (and very much so) art. How many even vaguely interesting art movies
>> have you seen in the US in recent years? How many art movies period?
>
>Hmmm... in terms of 'art' movies... isnt the Sundance film festival one
>of the most revered film festivals in the world for 'art' movies... they
>also have a TV station that shows these films to millions of house-holds
>in the U.S..
I think Cannes, Berlin, etc. are more prestigious, but that difference
in views may be due to press interest in Europe & USA (though, i
remember that even Ghent (my city) was on a top 15 Film Festival list
from a American film magazine.
>
>
>
>Then how would you measure demand ? Some elite telling us what is 'good'
defining good as heavily bought isn't really a good way to deal with
this problem. Ask 100 people why they went to American Pie II, and
most will say it was for pure entertainment, not because they wanted
to see a really good movie.
I think that a good 'cultural' thing must be something you don't watch
for pure entertainment, but because it has something extra to bring to
you.
Jeroen
Richard
have would be an indication of how involved Belgium is on the international
scene, not now diverse its people are.
It's great that you can read four languages, but that doesn't say anything
for your country's diversity. I can speak three fluently, understand four
and read five (i'm also 22 and not a linguist :). That doesn't make Canada
any more diverse - my first two languages are the official languages of the
country. It's the people that actually come from other countries - and not
the people running the embassies - that contribute to diversity. How many
people who live in Belgium have a mother tongue that is not an official
language of Belgium. Just think to all your close friends for example. As a
big collective group, how many different languages do you have between you?
How hard would it be to find a store that specializes in... I dunno say
ingredients for pakistani cuisine or good polish sausage? How far would you
have to go to find a synagogue? a mosque? a place of worship of any
religion giving a service in Ukraniane? It's things like that give you
diversity.
Now I could be completely wrong in my knowledge of Belgium, it might
completely surpass the US or Canada on my criteria, in which case I'd have
to pull my foot out of my mouth and apologise, but I don't think Belgium's
population is as diverse as that of Canada or the US.
Richard
"Jeroen Coolsaet" <jeroen.cools...@rug.ac.be> wrote in message
news:h4122u8m76j8dbqss...@4ax.com...
Go Fig
Jeroen Coolsaet <jeroen.cools...@rug.ac.be> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:08:26 GMT, Go Fig <go...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <qff12uc75fs80ktv2...@4ax.com>,
> > grey <n...@available.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Culture? I wish it were different, but in the US I find it fragmented,
> >
> >The U.S. is the most diverse society in the world... Immigrants from
> >throughout the world... this is her best asset not a liability.
>
> WRONG. AFAIK, Belgium is way more diverse than any state in the USA
> (or even the USA alltogether). Every existing country that is
> recognized worldwide has an embassy in Belgium. It is the site of many
> of the most important international Agencies (EU, NATO, SWIFT,...) and
> in se produces many international visitors.
Diversity has now evolved into this for its definition ?
Due to our relatively
> small size (only the inhabitants of the city of New York), we have a
> greater mixture.
> Above, we speak many languages (at least, we can read many languages,
> i won't say that my writing is that good, but i haven't got any
> problems with reading French, Dutch, English, German, (some) Spanish,
> (some) Italian, (some) Latin.
You do seem "diverse'... but thats not the point... in Los Angeles,
there are some 170 different native languages in the school system.
> I don't think that many American
> citizens can say they understand that many languages.
It appears that those you speak best are very close to your home...
could that play a part in it... Necessity ?
> (and no, i'm not a 66 year old man who studied languages. I'm 22 and
> studying Economics)
>
> >
> >
> >"art' is only a part of culture... where did Jazz come from ?
>
> (partly) Belgium, the inventor of the Saxophone was Adolphe Sax, a
> Belgian citizen.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> The culture in the US is based on consumerism--movies, books, TV, even
> >> (and very much so) art. How many even vaguely interesting art movies
> >> have you seen in the US in recent years? How many art movies period?
> >
> >Hmmm... in terms of 'art' movies... isnt the Sundance film festival one
> >of the most revered film festivals in the world for 'art' movies... they
> >also have a TV station that shows these films to millions of house-holds
> >in the U.S..
> I think Cannes,
Do you know anything about the history of the S.of France... it wasnt
the french that made it what it is today... if your ever on the famous
promenade there... check out the name of it.
> Berlin, etc. are more prestigious, but that difference
> in views may be due to press interest in Europe & USA (though, i
> remember that even Ghent (my city) was on a top 15 Film Festival list
> from a American film magazine.
What first run films are playing in your city today ?
> >Then how would you measure demand ? Some elite telling us what is 'good'
> defining good as heavily bought isn't really a good way to deal with
> this problem. Ask 100 people why they went to American Pie II, and
> most will say it was for pure entertainment, not because they wanted
> to see a really good movie.
> I think that a good 'cultural' thing must be something you don't watch
> for pure entertainment, but because it has something extra to bring to
> you.
Yes and thats the problem... whereas with cash... its more objective.
Enjoy your holiday and keep up with the books... it will serve you well
your whole life.
jay
Wed, Dec 19, 2001
mailto:go...@mac.com
>
> Jeroen
Keeger
>
>Thanks for pointing out blues and jazz -- both of which are PURELY American
>musical forms. I had forgotten about them in my own response.
And don't forget that RAP music, the last innovation (some might say)
in popular music since punk, also American.
Paul
Paul Tauger
"Keeger" <Strat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3c211b13...@news.ne.mediaone.net...
If it's all the same to you, I'd prefer to forget rap music. ;)
>
> Paul
Jeroen Coolsaet
wrote:
>To me things like the number of embassies and international agencies you
>have would be an indication of how involved Belgium is on the international
>scene, not now diverse its people are.
it does, because many of these agencies bring their own people here
(especially the EU and the embassies) for a rather short time,
bringing in new flesh each time, while some parts of USA migration
(e.g. Irish) are already from the early 1900.
>
>It's great that you can read four languages, but that doesn't say anything
>for your country's diversity. I can speak three fluently, understand four
>and read five (i'm also 22 and not a linguist :).
again, it does, but then you have to now our history. We have a
history of domination by other countries (Dutch, French, Spain,
German, Austrian, Roman,... groups have possessed our country (only
Roman is over 500 years ago). Therefore we had to adapt to many
different cultures. One of these consequences is the knowledge of many
languages that has become a tradition in Belgium.
>That doesn't make Canada
>any more diverse - my first two languages are the official languages of the
>country. It's the people that actually come from other countries - and not
>the people running the embassies - that contribute to diversity.
but the people running the embassies are often from the embassies'
country. So they bring their families,... with them.
>How many people who live in Belgium have a mother tongue that is not an official
>language of Belgium.
Some 10% are foreigners. Since a large part of them are Turc, Italian
or Maroccian (don't know how an inhabitant from Marocco is called),
most of them won't speak Dutch, French or German (3 official
languages). Some might speak French or German, but the percentage will
be rather low. Above, German is an official language, but it's only
used as the first language fro some 100 000 people.
>Just think to all your close friends for example. As a
>big collective group, how many different languages do you have between you?
Take the entire EU without Portugal & Finland and add Czechoslovakian,
(Marocco) Arabian (dunno if this is an official language), Swahili &
Kiniruanda and SudAfrican. Dunno if the Swiss girl i know can speak
retro-roman.
so, some 15 different languages.
>How hard would it be to find a store that specializes in... I dunno say
>ingredients for pakistani cuisine or good polish sausage?
normal supermarket (specialised pakistani goods can be found in a
nightshop 300m from here.
> How far would you have to go to find a synagogue?
had to look it up? There's a place where jews meet 2 km from here, but
a synagoge is 4km from here.
> a mosque?
in my neighbourhood
> a place of worship of any religion giving a service in Ukraniane?
there's a russian church in the city (3km from here) with services in
some Eastern languages. I suppose there will be some for Ukraine
people too.
> It's things like that give you
>diversity.
>
>Now I could be completely wrong in my knowledge of Belgium, it might
>completely surpass the US or Canada on my criteria, in which case I'd have
>to pull my foot out of my mouth and apologise, but I don't think Belgium's
>population is as diverse as that of Canada or the US.
i guess so, but more due to our small size & heavy concentration
(think that we're the 3rd most highly populated country in the world)
>
>Richard
>
Jeroen
Jeroen Coolsaet
>In article <h4122u8m76j8dbqss...@4ax.com>,
> Jeroen Coolsaet <jeroen.cools...@rug.ac.be> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:08:26 GMT, Go Fig <go...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <qff12uc75fs80ktv2...@4ax.com>,
>> > grey <n...@available.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Culture? I wish it were different, but in the US I find it fragmented,
>> >
>> >The U.S. is the most diverse society in the world... Immigrants from
>> >throughout the world... this is her best asset not a liability.
>>
>> WRONG. AFAIK, Belgium is way more diverse than any state in the USA
>> (or even the USA alltogether). Every existing country that is
>> recognized worldwide has an embassy in Belgium. It is the site of many
>> of the most important international Agencies (EU, NATO, SWIFT,...) and
>> in se produces many international visitors.
>
>Diversity has now evolved into this for its definition ?
just look at the other post where i explain this.
>
>
> Due to our relatively
>> small size (only the inhabitants of the city of New York), we have a
>> greater mixture.
>> Above, we speak many languages (at least, we can read many languages,
>> i won't say that my writing is that good, but i haven't got any
>> problems with reading French, Dutch, English, German, (some) Spanish,
>> (some) Italian, (some) Latin.
>
>You do seem "diverse'... but thats not the point... in Los Angeles,
>there are some 170 different native languages in the school system.
ok, we have the same thing, but does every American learn at least 4
languages in the school system for 6-14 year olds?
>
>> I don't think that many American
>> citizens can say they understand that many languages.
>
>
>It appears that those you speak best are very close to your home...
>could that play a part in it... Necessity ?
you're right, i don't speak mandarin. what a pity...
No, of course it has something to do with proximity, but i don't need
to learn 7 languages to be able to communicate with other people. A
good knowledge of English & French would be sufficient then.
>> >Hmmm... in terms of 'art' movies... isnt the Sundance film festival one
>> >of the most revered film festivals in the world for 'art' movies... they
>> >also have a TV station that shows these films to millions of house-holds
>> >in the U.S..
>> I think Cannes,
>
>Do you know anything about the history of the S.of France... it wasnt
>the french that made it what it is today... if your ever on the famous
>promenade there... check out the name of it.
i know that there's a American Avenue in france, but i don't know the
history of it, thought it had something to do with the WW II.
>
>> Berlin, etc. are more prestigious, but that difference
>> in views may be due to press interest in Europe & USA (though, i
>> remember that even Ghent (my city) was on a top 15 Film Festival list
>> from a American film magazine.
>
>What first run films are playing in your city today ?
hehe, a French-German coproduction & a Belgian movie (wednesday is
always the day when new movies come into play, so today you're
unlucky)
>
>
>
>Enjoy your holiday and keep up with the books... it will serve you well
>your whole life.
nah, i don't really like to become an economist. I chose wrong when i
was choosing my study. Too bad, but that happens... I'm enjoying my
life as a student now (i've just (at least 2 hours ago) returned from
a mass beer drinking scene: 6300 liters (i guess some 1400 gallons) of
beer for 1900 students: that's about 16 glasses of beer per student
(18-23 year old), it's a classic evening in my city.
Jeroen Coolsaet
>On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 21:35:29 GMT, Jeroen Coolsaet
><jeroen.cools...@rug.ac.be> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:08:26 GMT, Go Fig <go...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <qff12uc75fs80ktv2...@4ax.com>,
>>> grey <n...@available.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Culture? I wish it were different, but in the US I find it fragmented,
>>>
>>>The U.S. is the most diverse society in the world... Immigrants from
>>>throughout the world... this is her best asset not a liability.
>>
>>WRONG. AFAIK, Belgium is way more diverse than any state in the USA
>>(or even the USA alltogether).
>
>I spent five months in Belgium (over two years) when my
>son lived in Brussels and saw much of the country. I
>liked Belgium very much, but extremely diverse it is not.
>I realize there are two or three cultures within Belgium, and
>two or three languages as well, but the two main cultures
>do not seem to mix much and in their areas keep to their
>own. Brussels has more diversity in people than the rest
>of the country, but nothing like New York.
Did you go to Matonge (Brussels), Jew District (Antwerp), Turkish zone
(Ghent), Italian area (Genk)?
>
> There was a rather
>boring uniformity in food served in most restaurants.
are you sure you're talking about Belgium???
AFAIK (even in American press), Belgium is one of the highest ranked
country concerning restaurants & diversity (Michelin,...).
>
>My son very much enjoyed living and working there, and his
>job took him all over the country. He wished he could have
>stayed there for more than two years. But in two years time
>he had seen pretty much all Belgium had to offer, and he has
>never yet in 40 years of lots of travel exhausted the diversity
>of the United States. My own feeling, returning to New York
>from Belgium, was that much as I had enjoyed my stay there,
>I was pleased to be back in big, messy, and very ethnically
>diverse New York City.
ok, i know, you can see Belgium in, let's say, 2 weeks. But you can
see New York in 2 weeks (including the neighbourhood) and that's
(including surroundings) approx. the size & population of belgium.
Jeroen
Go Fig
Jeroen Coolsaet <jeroen.cools...@rug.ac.be> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:35:02 GMT, Go Fig <go...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <h4122u8m76j8dbqss...@4ax.com>,
> > Jeroen Coolsaet <jeroen.cools...@rug.ac.be> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:08:26 GMT, Go Fig <go...@mac.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <qff12uc75fs80ktv2...@4ax.com>,
> >> > grey <n...@available.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Culture? I wish it were different, but in the US I find it fragmented,
> >> >
> >> >The U.S. is the most diverse society in the world... Immigrants from
> >> >throughout the world... this is her best asset not a liability.
> >>
> >> WRONG. AFAIK, Belgium is way more diverse than any state in the USA
> >> (or even the USA alltogether). Every existing country that is
> >> recognized worldwide has an embassy in Belgium. It is the site of many
> >> of the most important international Agencies (EU, NATO, SWIFT,...) and
> >> in se produces many international visitors.
> >
> >Diversity has now evolved into this for its definition ?
> just look at the other post where i explain this.
You mean the embassy family thing... I find fault w/ the original
premise:
I doubt, withstanding Cuba and North Korea, that every other country
represented in Belgium is not ALSO represented in the U.S..
Moreover, in many major cities there are Consulates.
The diversity of Embassy employee's could hardly be termed diverse...
most I'm sure come from the upper class levels of their societies.
> >
> >
> > Due to our relatively
> >> small size (only the inhabitants of the city of New York), we have a
> >> greater mixture.
> >> Above, we speak many languages (at least, we can read many languages,
> >> i won't say that my writing is that good, but i haven't got any
> >> problems with reading French, Dutch, English, German, (some) Spanish,
> >> (some) Italian, (some) Latin.
> >
> >You do seem "diverse'... but thats not the point... in Los Angeles,
> >there are some 170 different native languages in the school system.
> ok, we have the same thing,
What school in Belgium has 170 native languages spoken in the homes of
the students ?
> but does every American learn at least 4
> languages in the school system for 6-14 year olds?
What would be the point of that... where would they use it... surely you
can appreciate the opportunity cost of this wasted effort.
> >> I don't think that many American
> >> citizens can say they understand that many languages.
Are you saying that 'culture' translates into number of languages spoken?
> >
> >
> >It appears that those you speak best are very close to your home...
> >could that play a part in it... Necessity ?
> you're right, i don't speak mandarin. what a pity...
> No, of course it has something to do with proximity, but i don't need
> to learn 7 languages to be able to communicate with other people. A
> good knowledge of English & French would be sufficient then.
That did come at the cost of learning something else....
>
> >> >Hmmm... in terms of 'art' movies... isnt the Sundance film festival one
> >> >of the most revered film festivals in the world for 'art' movies... they
> >> >also have a TV station that shows these films to millions of house-holds
> >> >in the U.S..
> >> I think Cannes,
> >
> >Do you know anything about the history of the S.of France... it wasnt
> >the french that made it what it is today... if your ever on the famous
> >promenade there... check out the name of it.
>
> i know that there's a American Avenue in france, but i don't know the
> history of it, thought it had something to do with the WW II.
Im talking about the great Palace Hotels of the S. of France and the
clientele that supported them from the start.
> >
> >> Berlin, etc. are more prestigious, but that difference
> >> in views may be due to press interest in Europe & USA (though, i
> >> remember that even Ghent (my city) was on a top 15 Film Festival list
> >> from a American film magazine.
> >
> >What first run films are playing in your city today ?
> hehe, a French-German coproduction & a Belgian movie (wednesday is
> always the day when new movies come into play, so today you're
> unlucky)
So you have but 2 new movies a week in Ghent... this is culture... but I
asked what first run films are PLAYING... not premiering.
> >Enjoy your holiday and keep up with the books... it will serve you well
> >your whole life.
> nah, i don't really like to become an economist. I chose wrong when i
> was choosing my study. Too bad, but that happens... I'm enjoying my
> life as a student now (i've just (at least 2 hours ago) returned from
> a mass beer drinking scene: 6300 liters (i guess some 1400 gallons) of
> beer for 1900 students: that's about 16 glasses of beer per student
> (18-23 year old), it's a classic evening in my city.
How many did you get into a VW bug ?
Cheers
jay
Wed, Dec 19, 2001
mailto:go...@mac.com
> >
> >jay
> >Wed, Dec 19, 2001
> >mailto:go...@mac.com
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Jeroen
> >>
>
--
devil
Come on, Belgium being very diverse? Prejudiced, and looking at
culturally different people as tropical birds is what it is. Vlaamse
blok etc.
Let's get real, will you, OK?
Carole Allen
>> >> WRONG. AFAIK, Belgium is way more diverse than any state in the USA
>> >> (or even the USA alltogether). Every existing country that is
>> >> recognized worldwide has an embassy in Belgium. It is the site of many
>> >> of the most important international Agencies (EU, NATO, SWIFT,...) and
>> >> in se produces many international visitors.
>
Embassy families lead very sheltered lives. A few years back my
sister and her family while in Paris met up with some friends in the
dipomatic corps. They had kids the same age, the embassy kids were
bi-lingual, and my sister thought how it would be a real broadening
experience for her kids to spend time with these embassy kids who had
lived in several cities. Well, they all lived in an embassy compound,
surrounded by other embassy families, they watched American TV
programming and American news, and all the Paris kids wanted to do
was talk about American stuff and play video games.
My niece and nephew got exposed to more cross-cultural influences
right here at home, reading and helping to plan the trip, learning
some French, then going into shops and ordering meats, cheeses, etc.,
for picnic lunches. They only spent 2 days with those folks, then
headed out to the countryside on their own.
I wouldn't judge a city's diversity by the number of embassy and trade
folks living there. Some parts of America are extremely diverse. Out
here in Seattle we are the doorway to the Pacific Rim...in addition to
many SE Asian ethnicities, we have Muslim, Ethiopian , Somalian, and
Russian communities. We have Native Americans, Blacks, Hispanics,
Filipinos, Samoans. We have Greekand Jewish communities. We have a
strong Japanese and Chinese presence dating back to the turn of the
century and before. And all these people interact with each other in
daily life. Normal people, not just trade reps or government
staffers.
You'll find similar diversity in cities up and down the coast, such as
LA and SF (and even Vancouver, BC - yes, I know it;s Canada, but it's
on our doorstep).
Jeroen Coolsaet
>In article <cno22uoaeuks5q87p...@4ax.com>,
> Jeroen Coolsaet <jeroen.cools...@rug.ac.be> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:35:02 GMT, Go Fig <go...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <h4122u8m76j8dbqss...@4ax.com>,
>> > Jeroen Coolsaet <jeroen.cools...@rug.ac.be> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:08:26 GMT, Go Fig <go...@mac.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <qff12uc75fs80ktv2...@4ax.com>,
>> >> > grey <n...@available.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>You mean the embassy family thing... I find fault w/ the original
>premise:
>
> I doubt, withstanding Cuba and North Korea, that every other country
> represented in Belgium is not ALSO represented in the U.S..
> Moreover, in many major cities there are Consulates.
off course, but my point is that you have the same kind of diversity,
but more concentrated in a smaller country.
>
> The diversity of Embassy employee's could hardly be termed diverse...
> most I'm sure come from the upper class levels of their societies.
not always, my sister shares her house with someone who works at the
French embassy, and she ain't high society (but she's French)
>
>> > Due to our relatively
>> >> small size (only the inhabitants of the city of New York), we have a
>> >> greater mixture.
>> >> Above, we speak many languages (at least, we can read many languages,
>> >> i won't say that my writing is that good, but i haven't got any
>> >> problems with reading French, Dutch, English, German, (some) Spanish,
>> >> (some) Italian, (some) Latin.
>> >
>> >You do seem "diverse'... but thats not the point... in Los Angeles,
>> >there are some 170 different native languages in the school system.
>
>> ok, we have the same thing,
>
>What school in Belgium has 170 native languages spoken in the homes of
>the students ?
as i understood the sentence, he was saying that there's education for
over 170 languages in 1 school. This is the case in my school.
If you're talking about 170 different countries in 1 school, well,
then i'll have to surrender. Although, i'm nnot that sure, i just
don't have any numbers. I guess on 30 000 students and personnel, we
won't find 170 different nations, but maybe (in fact rather likely)
more then 150 languages.
>
>> but does every American learn at least 4
>> languages in the school system for 6-14 year olds?
>
>What would be the point of that... where would they use it... surely you
>can appreciate the opportunity cost of this wasted effort.
Opportunity cost? they can learn to appreciate other cultures (off
course, you can't get many foreign channels on cable, so you can't
practice your French while watching a movie.
>
>> >> I don't think that many American
>> >> citizens can say they understand that many languages.
>
>Are you saying that 'culture' translates into number of languages spoken?
>
nope, but it's an important part to mix with other cultures. If you
can't speak French, French music is half that interesting. Mixing
culture has to come from yourself to, i guess.
>> >
>> >
>> >It appears that those you speak best are very close to your home...
>> >could that play a part in it... Necessity ?
>> you're right, i don't speak mandarin. what a pity...
>> No, of course it has something to do with proximity, but i don't need
>> to learn 7 languages to be able to communicate with other people. A
>> good knowledge of English & French would be sufficient then.
>
>That did come at the cost of learning something else....
nope, we have a very good general education system.
a recent report by the OECD (investigation in 27 countries) shows that
Flanders (my part of belgium) is 3rd on literacy, while USA is 15th.
For maths this is 3rd place (Belgium)& 19 place (USA), and concerning
science we have place nr. 9 (USA: 14)
>
>>
>
>Im talking about the great Palace Hotels of the S. of France and the
>clientele that supported them from the start.
ok, so what? it's most likely that european have funded the start of
the USA empire, but also you've helped us in 1945. We can go on and on
like that. However, i don't think some hotels would have made the
difference.
>
>> >
>> >> Berlin, etc. are more prestigious, but that difference
>> >> in views may be due to press interest in Europe & USA (though, i
>> >> remember that even Ghent (my city) was on a top 15 Film Festival list
>> >> from a American film magazine.
>> >
>> >What first run films are playing in your city today ?
>
>> hehe, a French-German coproduction & a Belgian movie (wednesday is
>> always the day when new movies come into play, so today you're
>> unlucky)
>
>So you have but 2 new movies a week in Ghent... this is culture... but I
>asked what first run films are PLAYING... not premiering.
with first run films i though you meant premieres, sorry. I don't
understand your question, but i'll try to give an overview:
we have 25 rooms (some 4000 seats) for 250 000 inhabitants. A belgian
company is market leader in Europe concerning filmcomplex exploitation
(www.kinepolis.com). Some 40 movies are run here every week (i guess a
rotation of 1/3 every week).
>
>
>> >Enjoy your holiday and keep up with the books... it will serve you well
>> >your whole life.
>> nah, i don't really like to become an economist. I chose wrong when i
>> was choosing my study. Too bad, but that happens... I'm enjoying my
>> life as a student now (i've just (at least 2 hours ago) returned from
>> a mass beer drinking scene: 6300 liters (i guess some 1400 gallons) of
>> beer for 1900 students: that's about 16 glasses of beer per student
>> (18-23 year old), it's a classic evening in my city.
>
>How many did you get into a VW bug ?
nah, we don't do things like that, we hold beerking elections:
In a knock-out format (sometimes literaly), people have to drink
1/2-liters (a pint-british size) beer as fast as they can. the winner
yersterday drunk a 1/2 liter in 3,82 seconds (try to to this, it's
somehow impossible), he was 19 years old (with a big beerbelly,
though).
(off course, we use real bear, with alcohol percentage of 5,5%
(Rodenbach).
Jeroen
Jeroen Coolsaet
>Jeroen Coolsaet wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >My son very much enjoyed living and working there, and his
>> >job took him all over the country. He wished he could have
>> >stayed there for more than two years. But in two years time
>> >he had seen pretty much all Belgium had to offer, and he has
>> >never yet in 40 years of lots of travel exhausted the diversity
>> >of the United States. My own feeling, returning to New York
>> >from Belgium, was that much as I had enjoyed my stay there,
>> >I was pleased to be back in big, messy, and very ethnically
>> >diverse New York City.
>> ok, i know, you can see Belgium in, let's say, 2 weeks. But you can
>> see New York in 2 weeks (including the neighbourhood) and that's
>> (including surroundings) approx. the size & population of belgium.
>
>Come on, Belgium being very diverse? Prejudiced, and looking at
>culturally different people as tropical birds is what it is. Vlaamse
>blok etc.
>
>Let's get real, will you, OK?
a) prejudicing has nothing to do with diversity
b) there is only a small part of the Belgian society who support the
Vlaams Blok. I guess there's the same tendency in many other countries
(swing to conservative right, often including racist/protective
arguments): Denmark, Austria, Norway, Italy, USA,... It's just a sad
story (personal opinion)
The 'Vlaams Blok' is a extreme-right party that only has a major
following in Flanders (wants separation from Belgium), and only has
15% in flanders (10% in entire Belgium).
Although, it has some (weird) racist elements, most people vote for
this party because of the separatist and conservative opinion (sadly,
it's the only real separatist & conservative party).
I disagree with their arguments, and most people do.
devil
>
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:39:05 GMT, devil <de...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >Come on, Belgium being very diverse? Prejudiced, and looking at
> >culturally different people as tropical birds is what it is. Vlaamse
> >blok etc.
> >
> >Let's get real, will you, OK?
>
> a) prejudicing has nothing to do with diversity
Eventually it does. Prejudice is a reaction against diversity, which
does not go without consequences.
> b) there is only a small part of the Belgian society who support the
> Vlaams Blok. I guess there's the same tendency in many other countries
> (swing to conservative right, often including racist/protective
> arguments): Denmark, Austria, Norway, Italy, USA,... It's just a sad
> story (personal opinion)
>
> The 'Vlaams Blok' is a extreme-right party that only has a major
> following in Flanders (wants separation from Belgium), and only has
> 15% in flanders (10% in entire Belgium).
15% is *quite significant* when you consider that these guys are openly
racist. Bottom line being that racist talk is socially acceptable, not
only in Belgium, BTW, but in other parts of Europe too (but not in North
America at least until the recent events), and in the end, some or
another form of racism, perhaps mild but real, becomes more or less part
of the consensus.
> Although, it has some (weird) racist elements, most people vote for
> this party because of the separatist and conservative opinion (sadly,
> it's the only real separatist & conservative party).
>
> I disagree with their arguments,
I would certainly hope so.
> and most people do.
But not enough of them unfortunately.
Richard
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:09:15 -0500, "Richard" <n...@available.com>
> wrote:
>
> >To me things like the number of embassies and international agencies you
> >have would be an indication of how involved Belgium is on the
international
> >scene, not now diverse its people are.
> it does, because many of these agencies bring their own people here
> (especially the EU and the embassies) for a rather short time,
> bringing in new flesh each time, while some parts of USA migration
> (e.g. Irish) are already from the early 1900.
See one of the other replies you got, people who work in embassy and
diplomats' families don't really count. I'm when I talk about there being
Mexicans (for example) living somewhere I'm not talking about there being
four or five families, I'm talking about there being a thriving Mexican
community were you can go about your business in Spanish for the most part,
pick up some Tecate (Mexican beer) a newspaper from Guadalajara a copy of
Amores Perros on DVD, and a *good* burrito...
> >It's great that you can read four languages, but that doesn't say
anything
> >for your country's diversity. I can speak three fluently, understand four
> >and read five (i'm also 22 and not a linguist :).
> again, it does, but then you have to now our history. We have a
> history of domination by other countries (Dutch, French, Spain,
> German, Austrian, Roman,... groups have possessed our country (only
> Roman is over 500 years ago). Therefore we had to adapt to many
> different cultures. One of these consequences is the knowledge of many
> languages that has become a tradition in Belgium.
How does your being able to speak four languages contribute to your
country's diversity? I speak Spanish fluently but I never use it unless I'm
chatting wih someone who speaks it as a first language. Otherwise I go about
my business in English or French. A language on its own makes no
difference - if I was to talk to another non-hispanic friend in Spanish,
we'd still be talking about the same things we'd normally be talking about -
you start experiencing different cultures and diversity when you get
immigrants coming in because they usually bring not only the language but
customs and traditions from their native land.
> >That doesn't make Canada
> >any more diverse - my first two languages are the official languages of
the
> >country. It's the people that actually come from other countries - and
not
> >the people running the embassies - that contribute to diversity.
> but the people running the embassies are often from the embassies'
> country. So they bring their families,... with them.
I know, but that number is pretty small compared to what you get when you
start having immigrants or refugees arriving 'en masse' to your country.
Once again, see the other post. They usually lead pretty sheltered lives and
have minimal contact with the locals.
> >How many people who live in Belgium have a mother tongue that is not an
official
> >language of Belgium.
> Some 10% are foreigners. Since a large part of them are Turc, Italian
> or Maroccian (don't know how an inhabitant from Marocco is called),
> most of them won't speak Dutch, French or German (3 official
> languages). Some might speak French or German, but the percentage will
> be rather low. Above, German is an official language, but it's only
> used as the first language fro some 100 000 people.
20% don't speak the official language as their first language here.
> >Just think to all your close friends for example. As a
> >big collective group, how many different languages do you have between
you?
> Take the entire EU without Portugal & Finland and add Czechoslovakian,
> (Marocco) Arabian (dunno if this is an official language), Swahili &
> Kiniruanda and SudAfrican. Dunno if the Swiss girl i know can speak
> retro-roman.
> so, some 15 different languages.
Okay, so we're even on this point.
> >How hard would it be to find a store that specializes in... I dunno say
> >ingredients for pakistani cuisine or good polish sausage?
> normal supermarket (specialised pakistani goods can be found in a
> nightshop 300m from here.
No no no no no, never go to a normal supermarket for specialty foods :-)
> > How far would you have to go to find a synagogue?
> had to look it up? There's a place where jews meet 2 km from here, but
> a synagoge is 4km from here.
> > a mosque?
> in my neighbourhood
> > a place of worship of any religion giving a service in Ukraniane?
> there's a russian church in the city (3km from here) with services in
> some Eastern languages. I suppose there will be some for Ukraine
> people too.
fair enough.
> >Now I could be completely wrong in my knowledge of Belgium, it might
> >completely surpass the US or Canada on my criteria, in which case I'd
have
> >to pull my foot out of my mouth and apologise, but I don't think
Belgium's
> >population is as diverse as that of Canada or the US.
> i guess so, but more due to our small size & heavy concentration
> (think that we're the 3rd most highly populated country in the world)
Well, I must admit, Belgium is quite a bit more diverse than I thought. But
from what you've told me it still doesn't have anywhere near the diversity
you can find in North America.
Richard
grey
wrote:
>"grey" <n...@available.com> wrote in message
>news:qff12uc75fs80ktv2...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 05:24:31 GMT, "Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)"
>> <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Paul Tauger wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at
>which
>> >> you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the
>cultural
>> >> equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
>> >> restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it
>as a
>> >> world cultural center.
>>
>> There's a big difference between what you see in the US and in Europe,
>> in my opinion. In the US, "culture" is utterly fragmented; there are
>> no cultural traditions stretching back that bring things together or
>> that you can draw from. No literary traditions worth mentioning, IMO.
>> Music? Nothing i can see besides screaming pop music. Art? If you
>
>Nothing but screaming pop? Try to go beyond what the media incessantly
>shoves in front of your face and take a look at what else there is out
>there. Try jazz to start with - it's neither screaming nor is it pop. Then
>move onto some blues, perhaps.
Well, when I said "pop" I meant popular music, by which I meant to
include r+b, country, etc...please remember, this is just my opinion
here (and I'm a classical music guy...)
>There's plenty of "screaming pop" coming from within Europe as well. Sure
>the US has produced the likes of Britney Spears and the Backstreet Boys but
>Europe - the UK in particular - is responsible for the Spice Girls, among
>others.
Yep, agreed.
><snip>
>
>Richard
>
grey
>In article <qff12uc75fs80ktv2...@4ax.com>,
> grey <n...@available.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 05:24:31 GMT, "Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)"
>> <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Paul Tauger wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at which
>> >> you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the cultural
>> >> equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
>> >> restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it as a
>> >> world cultural center.
>>
>> There's a big difference between what you see in the US and in Europe,
>> in my opinion. In the US, "culture" is utterly fragmented; there are
>> no cultural traditions stretching back that bring things together or
>> that you can draw from. No literary traditions worth mentioning, IMO.
>
>
>Hmm... why is it then that Europe gobbled up the writings of the 1840s
>by Mark Twain and Morton in tgheir Wild West journeys.
I can only say that argues well for their tolerance...I can agree that
Twain has written some subtle things, and Melville was outstanding,
but of the native writers of that time, including Poe, Hawthorne,
etc...well, sorry, they seem amateur stylists to me. So often I find
myself reading Euro writing...Boswell, Macaulay (not to everyone's
taste, I know), Hesse, Maugham, Orwell, etc...
>I believe that Mark Twain was, in fact, the MOST prolific of his
>time.... world wide... not a bad legacy.
>
>
>> Music? Nothing i can see besides screaming pop music.
>
>I agree... but that is why I would prefer to judge its merit, when
>possible, by demand... measured in money. The demand is strong.
Well, I look for subtley and depth, and craft. And although novels
with names like KILL SHOT or DEATH HIT may be popular, they don't make
it with me.
>> Art? If you have five American artists, you have five different "schools,"
>
>
>I can think of at least 3 new 'schools' that came from the
>renaissance... would you have been discounting them too, at the time ?
Not necessarily--what I was unhappy with is the chaotic proliferation
of "schools" in the arts, which more or less break down to one per
artist...and too often I've heard talks by the artist that awful,
explaining that you needed a great deal of context to even look at a
painting. I mean, "flatism"??
>> and it's nearly all silly stuff supported by gov't grants or elitist
>> institutions that is presented without context--a few lines here and
>> there, "colorfields", and so on. And much of it tries to scream just
>> like an ad to draw attention to itself (I don't need art to be
>> representational, but contextless in-joke art of low caliber just
>> doesn't interest me).
>
>Its in "the eye of the beholder'
Yep.
>> Same with so many plays.
>
>
>When I look at my 'London Planner" the biggest ads seem to be devoted to
>plays that originated on NYCs Broadway... again, the demand seems to be
>there.
>
>
>> Sorry, I don't count
>> restaurants and shopping as major cultural assets.
>>
>> Culture? I wish it were different, but in the US I find it fragmented,
>
>The U.S. is the most diverse society in the world... Immigrants from
>throughout the world... this is her best asset not a liability.
Now if her culture could only rise above commercialism...
>> out of context, and nearly always just plain uninteresting, IMO, and I
>> say that from year after year of disappointment. European traditions
>> stretch back hundreds of years in art and literature, and although you
>> can see much of the same contemporary trash in Europe now, there are
>> always those traditions to draw from, to build on, and to give
>> coherence.
>>
>> No, this is not an attack on the US, no need to get super defensive;
>> what I'm saying is that in MY OPINION, the cultural traditions and
>> contexts of Europe make all the difference TO ME. I find "culture" in
>> the US fragmented, often offensive (it's so political that it works
>> hard to be politically correct more often than not), and without
>> coherence. And I also find it inaccessible--"schools" change every
>> fifteen minutes (as in fifteen minutes of fame); it's become simply a
>> spectator sport. I'd rather get involved, both in writing and the
>> plastic arts. When you have a tradition to build on, even modest
>> artists can go fairly high; when everyone starts from the ground up
>> each and every time, you don't get very far from the ground. Which is
>> why art ends up screaming to attract attention to itself; insecure
>> traditions always do.
>
>"art' is only a part of culture... where did Jazz come from ?
I don't know, but IMO, I hope it goes back there...
>>
>> The culture in the US is based on consumerism--movies, books, TV, even
>> (and very much so) art. How many even vaguely interesting art movies
>> have you seen in the US in recent years? How many art movies period?
>
>Hmmm... in terms of 'art' movies... isnt the Sundance film festival one
>of the most revered film festivals in the world for 'art' movies... they
>also have a TV station that shows these films to millions of house-holds
>in the U.S..
I'm afraid I've never seen anything thoughtful and deep come out of
Sundance...although I don't pretend to be an expert on it.
>> Movies, magazines, TV, are all purposely and consciously aimed at
>> 18-26 year olds, because they buy stuff. And the result is simply
>> adolescent. Thirty years ago, adults went to movies in the US. Today?
>> The equation has changed. Same with magazines, books, TV, etc. Where's
>> the shared art, music, or literature between generations? What
>> cultural ground is being handed down?
>
>One that people the world over are willing to spend there hard earned
>money on.
Yep, and they also buy toliet paper. Escapism sells, vicarious killing
sells, power over others sells, etc., because that's where many
people's minds are stuck. Doesn't mean that that's all everyone wants
to see.
>> Look, your mileage may vary, this is all my opinion. I'm an American
>> citizen, so don't just take this as a wanton attack on US culture from
>> outside. And I wish things were different. But there simply aren't the
>> cultural traditions you see in Europe in the US. Maybe one day the
>> tide will turn away from that consumerism which seems to inform every
>> aspect of US life, but I'll have to see it to believe it. Consumerism
>> is not the culture I look for.
>
>Then how would you measure demand ? Some elite telling us what is 'good'
Subtley, depth, excellence of craft, and most especially, not just "in
reaction to", as in all the movies appealing to kids who are
anti-parent, or vicarious power movies, etc...that is, *primary*, not
secondary art forms. Works of art that can stand by themselves. That's
my own opinion, I'm not recommending an elite to enforce that or
anything, of course.
grey
<tauge...@usa.net> wrote:
>
>"grey" <n...@available.com> wrote in message
>news:qff12uc75fs80ktv2...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 05:24:31 GMT, "Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)"
>> <evg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Paul Tauger wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Unless you measure "culture" by maximum depth below street level at
>which
>> >> you will fine evidence of human habitation, then New York is the
>cultural
>> >> equal of any of the great cities of Europe. New York's museums,
>> >> restaurants, music, theaters, art, shopping AND history distinguish it
>as a
>> >> world cultural center.
>>
>> There's a big difference between what you see in the US and in Europe,
>> in my opinion. In the US, "culture" is utterly fragmented; there are
>> no cultural traditions stretching back that bring things together or
>> that you can draw from.
>
>This is so opaque as to defy understanding. Americans, who are all the
>descendents of immigrants, observe the cultural traditions of their
>ancestors, as well as those of more recent vintage.
That's why the word "culture" is so inadequate--it has at least four
common meanings that I know of. Here, I'm speaking of the arts,
including but not limited to writing, the plastic arts, music, etc.
>> No literary traditions worth mentioning, IMO.
>
>Mark Twain, John Irving, Arthur Miller, Edward Albee, O'Henry, Thoreau,
>Eugene O'Neill, Tennessee Williams, Truman Capote, Eudora Welty, Nathaniel
>Hawthorne . . .
>
>Shall I go on?
No, please! I find Miller, Williams, and Albee vile, intentionally
vulgar, and full of violence; Twain, Hawthorne, Irving, O'Henry, and
Poe (who you didn't mention) second rate and derivative. I mean, for
pete's sake, have you ever *read* O'Henry? His work is on the level of
Paul Harvey's "The rest of the story..." tripe. Poe's stories (read
them if you haven't) are really second rate. I'm probably as well
versed in American writers as you are, and find some of, say,
Hemmingway strong--but of course, he's no longer PC, so he's been
blacklisted off college syllabi--and a few others. But as I said in
another follow-up, I always find myself turning to the European
stylists who have traditions to build on, just my natural inclination;
yours doesn't have to be the same.
>
>> Music? Nothing i can see besides screaming pop music.
>
>Then change the channel. Virtually every city of any size has at least one
>opera company and one symphony orchestra. Musical theater was invented
>here. Julliard and the Boston Conservatory are world-class conservatories.
Agreed to a point, and that the point is--from where does that opera
or symphony spring? European cultural traditions, and, in fact, Europe
itself. Again, I'm NOT saying the US has to change, this is my taste
I'm talking about.
>> Art? If you
>> have five American artists, you have five different "schools,"
>
>For example? Off the top of my head, I can think of only two true
>"schools" -- American Primitive and the so-called "Trash Can" School.
>However, there were numerous significant Americans painting in other
>schools, including Impressionism, Surrealism and post-Modernism.
>Unfortunately, my knowledge of art doesn't include earlier periods, but I
>doubt that paint and paintbrushes were only introduced to the U.S. in 1880
>or so.
That may be because you, like nearly everyone else, feels locked out
of the arts in this area. Meanwhile, museum directors are filling
their shows with things most people have never heard of and have no
context for--for example, have you heard of more than two or three of
these recent schools? "pop art" (cartoonish), photo-realism, flatism,
material painting, combine painting, colorfield, hard edge, op art,
CoBrA, abstract symbolism, the "New York" school, the Ash Can school?
Few people even know what Dadaism or Cubism is and they're long gone.
>> and
>> it's nearly all silly stuff supported by gov't grants or elitist
>> institutions that is presented without context
>
>Sorry but you haven't a clue what you're talking about. Perhaps if your
>knowledge of American art were based on what you viewed in galleries and
>museums, instead of what you read in the more sensationalistic press, you'd
>have a better understanding of the scope of American art.
I can't say much here because it's simply an uninformed attack. I've
spent a great deal of time in galleries and museums, including behind
the scenes with directors and staff.
>>--a few lines here and
>> there, "colorfields", and so on. And much of it tries to scream just
>> like an ad to draw attention to itself (I don't need art to be
>> representational, but contextless in-joke art of low caliber just
>> doesn't interest me). Same with so many plays.
>
>Which plays would those be? You mean plays by Williams and O'Neill? Albee
>and Kopit? Lanford Wilson? LeRoi Jones (aka Baraka)?
Yes, exactly, Williams, O'Neill, and Albee all come readily to mind,
as does Mamet. I really, really find their work violent, nasty, and
intentionally vulgar to the point of disgust (ever see Glengarry Glen
Ross??).
>Have you even read any of these, much less seen them? Clearly, you don't
>know the first thing about American theater.
Now why do you have to stoop to the level of attacks like this? I was
answering your questions in good faith, but it's going to be hard to
take the rest of your response seriously.
>>Sorry, I don't count
>> restaurants and shopping as major cultural assets.
>
>Neither do I.
>
>>
>> Culture? I wish it were different, but in the US I find it fragmented,
>> out of context, and nearly always just plain uninteresting, IMO,
>
>Fortunately, your apparently not-too-well-informed-O doesn't determine the
>scope of cultural activity in the U.S.
As I said, I was talking about my own perferences. You're making it
into some kind of attack. I wish you'd knock that off.
>>
>> No, this is not an attack on the US, no need to get super defensive;
>
>No, just an attack on reality. I'm not defensive -- just appalled at the
>apparent lack of familiarity with America's cultural base.
Again, this is simply an uncalled for, and as it turns out, groundless
attack.
>> The culture in the US is based on consumerism--movies, books, TV, even
>> (and very much so) art.
>
>Clearly, there's no point in responding to you any further. It is said that
>your education, so as it is, was so deficient as to leave you with this kind
>of a shallow, ill-informed understanding of the U.S.
Wow. I guess that at this point, you leave me no alternative but to
return the favor. You know nothing about me, yet your whole
(uncalled-for) attack centers on telling me I have no experience! What
if I wrote to you at this point, "It is said that your education, so
as it is, was so deficient as to leave you with this kind of a
shallow, ill-informed understanding of the U.S."? Makes me wonder how
I got under your skin so far and why you feel so defensive.
Paul Tauger
As am I.
>
> >> No literary traditions worth mentioning, IMO.
> >
> >Mark Twain, John Irving, Arthur Miller, Edward Albee, O'Henry, Thoreau,
> >Eugene O'Neill, Tennessee Williams, Truman Capote, Eudora Welty,
Nathaniel
> >Hawthorne . . .
> >
> >Shall I go on?
>
> No, please! I find Miller, Williams, and Albee vile, intentionally
> vulgar, and full of violence;
I have no idea how to respond to this. Where do you find vulgarity in
Miller? And violence in Williams? Yes, there is an off-stage rape in
Streetcar, but no comparable violence in his other works. Albee was a
second-generation absurdist, i.e. writing the style rather than the
philosophy -- neither vulgarity nor violence there.
> Twain, Hawthorne, Irving, O'Henry, and
> Poe (who you didn't mention) second rate and derivative. I mean, for
> pete's sake, have you ever *read* O'Henry?
Sure, and I don't consider him second-rate. Derivative? Perhaps, but
_every_ author is derivative to the extent that they are influenced by
others.
> His work is on the level of
> Paul Harvey's "The rest of the story..." tripe. Poe's stories (read
> them if you haven't) are really second rate.
I'm not a great Poe fan. How about Steinbeck? F. Scott Fitzgerald?
Salinger?
> I'm probably as well
> versed in American writers as you are, and find some of, say,
> Hemmingway strong--but of course, he's no longer PC, so he's been
> blacklisted off college syllabi--and a few others. But as I said in
> another follow-up, I always find myself turning to the European
> stylists who have traditions to build on, just my natural inclination;
> yours doesn't have to be the same.
Then please don't pass off personal preference as an indictment of American
literature in general. I, for one, can't stand Dickens -- I think he's
unnecessarily wordy and overly sentimental. I don't use my personal taste
as a basis for condemning all of English literature.
>
> >
> >> Music? Nothing i can see besides screaming pop music.
> >
> >Then change the channel. Virtually every city of any size has at least
one
> >opera company and one symphony orchestra. Musical theater was invented
> >here. Julliard and the Boston Conservatory are world-class
conservatories.
>
> Agreed to a point, and that the point is--from where does that opera
> or symphony spring? European cultural traditions, and, in fact, Europe
> itself.
Yes, exactly the same place from which these American_ cultural traditions
have arisen. What do culture origins have to do with present culture? In
another post, I mentioned that the stagecraft at La Scala was somewhat less
than that at the Met. By your definition, the opposite should be true.
> Again, I'm NOT saying the US has to change, this is my taste
> I'm talking about.
>
> >> Art? If you
> >> have five American artists, you have five different "schools,"
> >
> >For example? Off the top of my head, I can think of only two true
> >"schools" -- American Primitive and the so-called "Trash Can" School.
> >However, there were numerous significant Americans painting in other
> >schools, including Impressionism, Surrealism and post-Modernism.
> >Unfortunately, my knowledge of art doesn't include earlier periods, but I
> >doubt that paint and paintbrushes were only introduced to the U.S. in
1880
> >or so.
>
> That may be because you, like nearly everyone else, feels locked out
> of the arts in this area.
I don't feel locked out -- I just don't care for Romanticism and before.
The art is certainly there -- I just prefer to look at other things when I
visit museums.
> Meanwhile, museum directors are filling
> their shows with things most people have never heard of and have no
> context for--for example, have you heard of more than two or three of
> these recent schools? "pop art" (cartoonish), photo-realism, flatism,
> material painting, combine painting, colorfield, hard edge, op art,
> CoBrA, abstract symbolism, the "New York" school, the Ash Can school?
Yes to most, no to some. Ash Can (which I incorrectly identified as Trash
Can) isn't all that recent, nor is pop and op (though I suppose some people
are still working in each). However, this is the direction modern art has
taken, and not just in America. I don't understand or appreciate Kandinski,
either, but, then again, Monet was condemned by the Salon, too.
> Few people even know what Dadaism or Cubism is and they're long gone.
How can you say that? People either have a liberal arts education, or they
don't. They either have an interest in art, or they don't. I suspect that
the percentage of cultural philistines is fairly constant in Europe and in
America.
>
> >> and
> >> it's nearly all silly stuff supported by gov't grants or elitist
> >> institutions that is presented without context
> >
> >Sorry but you haven't a clue what you're talking about. Perhaps if your
> >knowledge of American art were based on what you viewed in galleries and
> >museums, instead of what you read in the more sensationalistic press,
you'd
> >have a better understanding of the scope of American art.
>
> I can't say much here because it's simply an uninformed attack. I've
> spent a great deal of time in galleries and museums, including behind
> the scenes with directors and staff.
"silly stuff supported by gov't grants or elitist institutions" is what
provoked my response. I don't consider most American art museums to be
elitist -- in fact, quite the contrary, I think they frequently go too far
in an attempt to be "relevant" to the "average person," whatever that might
be. I attended the "Sensations" exhibit at the Brooklyn Museum -- did you?
The only thing that was objectionable about it was the inaccurate and
sensationalistic press accounts.
And one of the great tragedies in this country is the stranglehold that has
been placed on government funding of the arts.
>
> >>--a few lines here and
> >> there, "colorfields", and so on. And much of it tries to scream just
> >> like an ad to draw attention to itself (I don't need art to be
> >> representational, but contextless in-joke art of low caliber just
> >> doesn't interest me). Same with so many plays.
> >
> >Which plays would those be? You mean plays by Williams and O'Neill?
Albee
> >and Kopit? Lanford Wilson? LeRoi Jones (aka Baraka)?
>
> Yes, exactly, Williams, O'Neill, and Albee all come readily to mind,
> as does Mamet. I really, really find their work violent, nasty, and
> intentionally vulgar to the point of disgust (ever see Glengarry Glen
> Ross??).
Yep -- the original production in New York. I didn't find it vulgar,
violent or nasty, though it was very depressing. Is Iceman Cometh nasty?
Long Day's Journey Into Night intentionally vulgar? Glass Menagerie
violent? Cat on a Hot Tin Roof? Streetcar?
Are you a neo-classicist who believes that all art must be uplifting and
inspiring?
>
> >Have you even read any of these, much less seen them? Clearly, you don't
> >know the first thing about American theater.
>
> Now why do you have to stoop to the level of attacks like this?
I apologize for the personal attack. However, I tend to react very strongly
to "Americans are all classless boors" threads which seem to spring up here
like mushrooms whenever it rains.
> I was
> answering your questions in good faith, but it's going to be hard to
> take the rest of your response seriously.
>
> >>Sorry, I don't count
> >> restaurants and shopping as major cultural assets.
> >
> >Neither do I.
> >
> >>
> >> Culture? I wish it were different, but in the US I find it fragmented,
> >> out of context, and nearly always just plain uninteresting, IMO,
> >
> >Fortunately, your apparently not-too-well-informed-O doesn't determine
the
> >scope of cultural activity in the U.S.
>
> As I said, I was talking about my own perferences.
You're making it
> into some kind of attack. I wish you'd knock that off.
But you attacked American culture. As long as you're talking about your
personal tastes, fine, no argument. You've condemned the entire U.S. And,
yes, I take that personally.
>
> >>
> >> No, this is not an attack on the US, no need to get super defensive;
> >
> >No, just an attack on reality. I'm not defensive -- just appalled at the
> >apparent lack of familiarity with America's cultural base.
>
> Again, this is simply an uncalled for, and as it turns out, groundless
> attack.
And, again, I apologize for the personal attack, but still object, most
strongly, to what I (and, apparently, others) perceive as a blanket
condemnation of American cultural activity.
>
> >> The culture in the US is based on consumerism--movies, books, TV, even
> >> (and very much so) art.
> >
> >Clearly, there's no point in responding to you any further. It is said
that
> >your education, so as it is, was so deficient as to leave you with this
kind
> >of a shallow, ill-informed understanding of the U.S.
>
> Wow. I guess that at this point, you leave me no alternative but to
> return the favor. You know nothing about me, yet your whole
> (uncalled-for) attack centers on telling me I have no experience!
Then please re-read what you've written. To dismiss three centuries of
American artistic activity as consumerism-based is, to put it charitably,
baseless hyperbole.
> What
> if I wrote to you at this point, "It is said that your education, so
> as it is, was so deficient as to leave you with this kind of a
> shallow, ill-informed understanding of the U.S."? Makes me wonder how
> I got under your skin so far and why you feel so defensive.
I've explained why you've gotten under my skin. If you want to dismiss all
of American literature, theater, music and art as not to your personal
taste, then fine, though I find it an incredible position.
>
>
Richard
Alright, so then America isn't (musically) this big cultural void that - it
seemed - you were trying to make it out to be. Instead we can establish that
you simply don't like the music present in contemporary american culture. No
problem, you're entitled to your own opinion. I can't stand R&B or country
music myself, either.
Despite the fact the closest I've ever been to New York city is New Jersey
and the last time I went was a good 15 years ago, I somehow find it VERY
hard to believe that there is NO live classical music in NYC that you
consider to be at the same level as what is available in Europe.
Richard
Jeroen Coolsaet
wrote:
>"Jeroen Coolsaet" <jeroen.cools...@rug.ac.be> wrote in message
>news:pln22uof3paim6q6i...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:09:15 -0500, "Richard" <n...@available.com>
>> wrote:
>
>See one of the other replies you got, people who work in embassy and
>diplomats' families don't really count. I'm when I talk about there being
>Mexicans (for example) living somewhere I'm not talking about there being
>four or five families, I'm talking about there being a thriving Mexican
>community were you can go about your business in Spanish for the most part,
>pick up some Tecate (Mexican beer) a newspaper from Guadalajara a copy of
>Amores Perros on DVD, and a *good* burrito...
you can buy Amores Perros in every DVD/Video shop here, burrito's
(rather 'fresh ones') can be bought in a lot of supermarkets, Spanish
papers (international news) are widely available but i don't know
about Tecate.
>
>> >It's great that you can read four languages, but that doesn't say
>anything
>> >for your country's diversity. I can speak three fluently, understand four
>> >and read five (i'm also 22 and not a linguist :).
>
>> again, it does, but then you have to now our history. We have a
>> history of domination by other countries (Dutch, French, Spain,
>> German, Austrian, Roman,... groups have possessed our country (only
>> Roman is over 500 years ago). Therefore we had to adapt to many
>> different cultures. One of these consequences is the knowledge of many
>> languages that has become a tradition in Belgium.
>
>How does your being able to speak four languages contribute to your
>country's diversity? I speak Spanish fluently but I never use it unless I'm
>chatting wih someone who speaks it as a first language. Otherwise I go about
>my business in English or French. A language on its own makes no
>difference - if I was to talk to another non-hispanic friend in Spanish,
>we'd still be talking about the same things we'd normally be talking about -
>you start experiencing different cultures and diversity when you get
>immigrants coming in because they usually bring not only the language but
>customs and traditions from their native land.
ok, but when you have the ability to see some people (definitely less
than in NY, i agree), go to spanish pubs & restaurants, watch f.e. TVE
(Spanish television station), and watch movies with subtitles (no
stupid dubs), then you can say that you have a diverse culture (in my
opinion). (same with French, German, Italian, Maroco,...
>
>
>> but the people running the embassies are often from the embassies'
>> country. So they bring their families,... with them.
>
>I know, but that number is pretty small compared to what you get when you
>start having immigrants or refugees arriving 'en masse' to your country.
yep, but these have adapted to USA's culture. 'Our' immigrants are
freshly imported every year.
>Once again, see the other post. They usually lead pretty sheltered lives and
>have minimal contact with the locals.
i tend to disagree, at least for the normal clercs.
>
>> >How many people who live in Belgium have a mother tongue that is not an
>official
>> >language of Belgium.
>
>> Some 10% are foreigners. Since a large part of them are Turc, Italian
>> or Maroccian (don't know how an inhabitant from Marocco is called),
>> most of them won't speak Dutch, French or German (3 official
>> languages). Some might speak French or German, but the percentage will
>> be rather low. Above, German is an official language, but it's only
>> used as the first language fro some 100 000 people.
>
>20% don't speak the official language as their first language here.
yep, but that's (for a large part) only because of one group of
immigrants (Mexican/Spanish)
>
>> >Just think to all your close friends for example. As a
>> >big collective group, how many different languages do you have between
>you?
>
>> Take the entire EU without Portugal & Finland and add Czechoslovakian,
>> (Marocco) Arabian (dunno if this is an official language), Swahili &
>> Kiniruanda and SudAfrican. Dunno if the Swiss girl i know can speak
>> retro-roman.
>> so, some 15 different languages.
>
>Okay, so we're even on this point.
>
>> >How hard would it be to find a store that specializes in... I dunno say
>> >ingredients for pakistani cuisine or good polish sausage?
>
>> normal supermarket (specialised pakistani goods can be found in a
>> nightshop 300m from here.
>
>No no no no no, never go to a normal supermarket for specialty foods :-)
you have some specialised places where you can find for instance
Nigerian foods.
>
>> > How far would you have to go to find a synagogue?
>> had to look it up? There's a place where jews meet 2 km from here, but
>> a synagoge is 4km from here.
>> > a mosque?
>> in my neighbourhood
>> > a place of worship of any religion giving a service in Ukraniane?
>> there's a russian church in the city (3km from here) with services in
>> some Eastern languages. I suppose there will be some for Ukraine
>> people too.
>
>fair enough.
>
>> >Now I could be completely wrong in my knowledge of Belgium, it might
>> >completely surpass the US or Canada on my criteria, in which case I'd
>have
>> >to pull my foot out of my mouth and apologise, but I don't think
>Belgium's
>> >population is as diverse as that of Canada or the US.
>
>> i guess so, but more due to our small size & heavy concentration
>> (think that we're the 3rd most highly populated country in the world)
>
>Well, I must admit, Belgium is quite a bit more diverse than I thought. But
>from what you've told me it still doesn't have anywhere near the diversity
>you can find in North America.
>
Yep, but it's more concentrated.
>Richard
>
grey
wrote:
>Alright, so then America isn't (musically) this big cultural void that - it
>seemed - you were trying to make it out to be. Instead we can establish that
>you simply don't like the music present in contemporary american culture. No
>problem, you're entitled to your own opinion. I can't stand R&B or country
>music myself, either.
Hi Richard:
Yep, it was all my own opinion and taste, as I was saying a number of
times...no reflection meant on other of different tastes.
>Despite the fact the closest I've ever been to New York city is New Jersey
>and the last time I went was a good 15 years ago, I somehow find it VERY
>hard to believe that there is NO live classical music in NYC that you
>consider to be at the same level as what is available in Europe.
I didn't mean that--there is, no question, some excellent performers
in the US. And some excellent symphonies. What I meant was that
classical music comes from a cultural tradition that is nearly all
European. (As a side note--I know a number of symphony members in
various national-level symphonies in the US, and man, they all *hate*
classical music. My guess has always been because there's never
anything "new" and they get tired of it, and US culture encourages
that. They all want their symphonies to play modern stuff, Philip
Glass, etc...)