It seems that over half of Democratic senators are now calling for Franken to resign. I'm guessing he'll probably do it, if that many of his own colleagues are saying it.
I can't fathom he is having a press conference tomorrow to shake his fist in the air and refuse to step down, despite the fact that 3/4 of his caucus has now turned on him. He has proven he is capable of shame, which is good, and it would be very, very surprising if tomorrow wasn't the end. As has been mentioned, Gov. Mark Dayton of MN will get to name a replacement, but, because of the rules in MN, instead of having to defend the seat in 2020, Dems have to defend yet ANOTHER seat in 2018. Which means both MN Senate seats and the governorship are up in MN next year. Given the climate in the country, and the fact that MN narrowly remained blue in 2016, I still like their chances in all 3 of those races, but MN is no different than the rest of the country (and I know because I have lived there most of my life). The Twin Cities, Rochester and Duluth (and to an extent the Iron Range because of unions) are extremely liberal. The rural areas of the state might as well be Alabama. So, Dems absolutely ARE giving something up here. They have to defend a seat 2 years early in a year where they are already defending almost 3 times as many seats as Republicans on the Senate side. Which, again, just makes the already steep, steep hill to take back BOTH chambers nearly impossible. They likely weren't going to take the Senate back anyway, but this just drains more financial resources.
I actually was not aware until I was listening to the Twin Cities top political reporter on the way home from work that this move will mandate the election be next year. Franken was supposed to be up in '20, but it's now clear that a resignation stipulates that the Governor's appointment only lasts til the next election. I am unsure if this ALSO means that the same person would have to win again in '20, or if this just means that both MN Senate seats are now going to be contested every 6 years at the same time. Regardless, even though it IS true that a Democrat is going to take this seat, it does not really put them in a very rosy situation considering the uphill climb the Senate always was. Frankly, I think it makes the decision of the caucus to turn on him more meaningful.
Wow, that is interesting about both Senate seats in MN possibly being elected at the same time. I can't believe that could be the net result here simply for the fact that the winds of change would potentially hit Minnesota harder than other states. Odds that they would ever have senators of two parties are really slim if this happens...
I don't get it either, I have never heard of this before. When Wellstone was killed in the plane crash, Norm Coleman won (mostly because of a right-wing smear campaign regarding his memorial service) so it never came up. Klobuchar is not going to lose (the only reason she didn't come out today as one of the members calling for him to resign is because I suspect she wanted to pay him the courtesy of telling him to do so in private, and she has issued a statement saying she has spoken to him and is confident he will make the right decision tomorrow, which tells me she took it upon herself to be the one who told him face to face that he had to step down). Dayton, in my opinion, in this climate, needs to pick the most qualified Democratic women in the state for this position. I think it NEEDS to be a woman given the circumstances.
This is the only forum I know where Cthulhu showing up in a political discussion thread is considered absolutely normal and attracts no harsh comments
Cthulhu for America is still my absolute favorite Twitter account. Everyone should check it out. And there is this full-fledged campaign website all ready to go for 2020:
Personally I'd vote for Charles Dexter Ward or Herbert West before Cthulhu. At least they're human (and both are probably better human beings than Moore).
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
His Lord Dunsany Dream-world stuff is of an entirely different bent than the Mythos or run-of-the-mill Gothic horror. Though I remember liking "The Doom that Came to Sarnath", thought certainly not as well as I like something like "The Outsider" or, especially, "The Music of Erich Zann". To tie it in politically (so we don't go off topic) Lovecraft is a great discussion point for whether one can enjoy art when the artist holds views they find reprehensible. Obviously, everyone knows Lovecraft was a full-on racist (and certainly everyone knows about the name of the cat in "The Rats in the Walls"). I reconcile it with the fact that HP Lovecraft lived perhaps the most sheltered, hermetic life of any figure I have ever read about. He was raised in an almost aristocratic atmosphere by his aunts but it seemed to me his entire adult life was spent nearly destitute. I doubt he was a good dinner companion, or good companion in general.
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
If you like those then I recommend Dunsany if you haven't read him already. A big influence on Lovecraft & Tolkien. One of my favourites opens: "The Gibbelins eat, as is well known, nothing less good than man."
I think it NEEDS to be a woman given the circumstances.
Politico is saying it'll be the Lieutenant Governor, Tina Smith.
If this is true then Democrats are being even MORE open and transparent about things, because it doesn't appear Ms. Smith is even interested in continuing on after the next year. I actually would NOT go this far. I would appoint someone who is interested in keeping the seat, but it is what it is. Then again, an open Democratic primary next year would kill the Republican attack about "Al Franken's seat" as it would completely remove his scandal from the equation altogether.
The thing is, I'm not sure how big the news of one more Al Franken groping allegation would have been this morning if half a dozen female Senators hadn't demanded his resignation within 30 minutes of each other. They clearly saw it and orchestrated the move. The bet is that the public actually is really sickened by all these sexual assault and harassment cases coming out and they made the calculation that coming down as the party who stands up to it is where they want to be. In the short term, the GOP gains power because they won't hold their own accountable. Whether that works in the long-run is a story yet to be written.
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
His Lord Dunsany Dream-world stuff is of an entirely different bent than the Mythos or run-of-the-mill Gothic horror. Though I remember liking "The Doom that Came to Sarnath", thought certainly not as well as I like something like "The Outsider" or, especially, "The Music of Erich Zann". To tie it in politically (so we don't go off topic) Lovecraft is a great discussion point for whether one can enjoy art when the artist holds views they find reprehensible. Obviously, everyone knows Lovecraft was a full-on racist (and certainly everyone knows about the name of the cat in "The Rats in the Walls"). I reconcile it with the fact that HP Lovecraft lived perhaps the most sheltered, hermetic life of any figure I have ever read about. He was raised in an almost aristocratic atmosphere by his aunts but it seemed to me his entire adult life was spent nearly destitute. I doubt he was a good dinner companion, or good companion in general.
Of course you have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. I couldn't listen to any of my favorite rock bands if I looked at them as role models. My favorite bands are Alice in Chains, Rage Against the Machine, Godsmack, Stone Temple Pilots, Black Sabbath (with Ozzy), Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, Ministry, Soundgarden, Fleetwood Mac, Jefferson Airplane, Billy Holiday, Pink Floyd, etc... Not exactly the best moral values in that bunch. With just a little change in my upbringing I'd probably be dead now from a drug overdose!
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
His Lord Dunsany Dream-world stuff is of an entirely different bent than the Mythos or run-of-the-mill Gothic horror. Though I remember liking "The Doom that Came to Sarnath", thought certainly not as well as I like something like "The Outsider" or, especially, "The Music of Erich Zann". To tie it in politically (so we don't go off topic) Lovecraft is a great discussion point for whether one can enjoy art when the artist holds views they find reprehensible. Obviously, everyone knows Lovecraft was a full-on racist (and certainly everyone knows about the name of the cat in "The Rats in the Walls"). I reconcile it with the fact that HP Lovecraft lived perhaps the most sheltered, hermetic life of any figure I have ever read about. He was raised in an almost aristocratic atmosphere by his aunts but it seemed to me his entire adult life was spent nearly destitute. I doubt he was a good dinner companion, or good companion in general.
Of course you have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. I couldn't listen to any of my favorite rock bands if I looked at them as role models. My favorite bands are Alice in Chains, Rage Against the Machine, Godsmack, Stone Temple Pilots, Black Sabbath (with Ozzy), Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, Ministry, Soundgarden, Fleetwood Mac, Jefferson Airplane, Billy Holiday, Pink Floyd, etc... Not exactly the best moral values in that bunch. With just a little change in my upbringing I'd probably be dead now from a drug overdose!
Godsmack sticks out like a sore thumb among a group of legends lol.......
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
His Lord Dunsany Dream-world stuff is of an entirely different bent than the Mythos or run-of-the-mill Gothic horror. Though I remember liking "The Doom that Came to Sarnath", thought certainly not as well as I like something like "The Outsider" or, especially, "The Music of Erich Zann". To tie it in politically (so we don't go off topic) Lovecraft is a great discussion point for whether one can enjoy art when the artist holds views they find reprehensible. Obviously, everyone knows Lovecraft was a full-on racist (and certainly everyone knows about the name of the cat in "The Rats in the Walls"). I reconcile it with the fact that HP Lovecraft lived perhaps the most sheltered, hermetic life of any figure I have ever read about. He was raised in an almost aristocratic atmosphere by his aunts but it seemed to me his entire adult life was spent nearly destitute. I doubt he was a good dinner companion, or good companion in general.
Of course you have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. I couldn't listen to any of my favorite rock bands if I looked at them as role models. My favorite bands are Alice in Chains, Rage Against the Machine, Godsmack, Stone Temple Pilots, Black Sabbath (with Ozzy), Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, Ministry, Soundgarden, Fleetwood Mac, Jefferson Airplane, Billy Holiday, Pink Floyd, etc... Not exactly the best moral values in that bunch. With just a little change in my upbringing I'd probably be dead now from a drug overdose!
Godsmack sticks out like a sore thumb among a group of legends lol.......
They have a few songs in their first two albums that I really love. Voodoo is one that I really like. The Spiral is also a really good song that you may not have heard.
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
His Lord Dunsany Dream-world stuff is of an entirely different bent than the Mythos or run-of-the-mill Gothic horror. Though I remember liking "The Doom that Came to Sarnath", thought certainly not as well as I like something like "The Outsider" or, especially, "The Music of Erich Zann". To tie it in politically (so we don't go off topic) Lovecraft is a great discussion point for whether one can enjoy art when the artist holds views they find reprehensible. Obviously, everyone knows Lovecraft was a full-on racist (and certainly everyone knows about the name of the cat in "The Rats in the Walls"). I reconcile it with the fact that HP Lovecraft lived perhaps the most sheltered, hermetic life of any figure I have ever read about. He was raised in an almost aristocratic atmosphere by his aunts but it seemed to me his entire adult life was spent nearly destitute. I doubt he was a good dinner companion, or good companion in general.
Of course you have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. I couldn't listen to any of my favorite rock bands if I looked at them as role models. My favorite bands are Alice in Chains, Rage Against the Machine, Godsmack, Stone Temple Pilots, Black Sabbath (with Ozzy), Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, Ministry, Soundgarden, Fleetwood Mac, Jefferson Airplane, Billy Holiday, Pink Floyd, etc... Not exactly the best moral values in that bunch. With just a little change in my upbringing I'd probably be dead now from a drug overdose!
Godsmack sticks out like a sore thumb among a group of legends lol.......
They have a few songs in their first two albums that I really love. Voodoo is one that I really like. The Spiral is also a really good song that you may not have heard.
I think I am lumping them in with Sevendust and all I can think about is driving around in my friend's Camero after an Away Girl's basketball game. Also Drowning Pool probably played during that drive as well. It wasn't the golden age of music by a long shot.
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
His Lord Dunsany Dream-world stuff is of an entirely different bent than the Mythos or run-of-the-mill Gothic horror. Though I remember liking "The Doom that Came to Sarnath", thought certainly not as well as I like something like "The Outsider" or, especially, "The Music of Erich Zann". To tie it in politically (so we don't go off topic) Lovecraft is a great discussion point for whether one can enjoy art when the artist holds views they find reprehensible. Obviously, everyone knows Lovecraft was a full-on racist (and certainly everyone knows about the name of the cat in "The Rats in the Walls"). I reconcile it with the fact that HP Lovecraft lived perhaps the most sheltered, hermetic life of any figure I have ever read about. He was raised in an almost aristocratic atmosphere by his aunts but it seemed to me his entire adult life was spent nearly destitute. I doubt he was a good dinner companion, or good companion in general.
Of course you have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. I couldn't listen to any of my favorite rock bands if I looked at them as role models. My favorite bands are Alice in Chains, Rage Against the Machine, Godsmack, Stone Temple Pilots, Black Sabbath (with Ozzy), Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, Ministry, Soundgarden, Fleetwood Mac, Jefferson Airplane, Billy Holiday, Pink Floyd, etc... Not exactly the best moral values in that bunch. With just a little change in my upbringing I'd probably be dead now from a drug overdose!
Godsmack sticks out like a sore thumb among a group of legends lol.......
They have a few songs in their first two albums that I really love. Voodoo is one that I really like. The Spiral is also a really good song that you may not have heard.
I think I am lumping them in with Sevendust and all I can think about is driving around in my friend's Camero after an Away Girl's basketball game. Also Drowning Pool probably played during that drive as well. It wasn't the golden age of music by a long shot.
They took their name from an Alice in Chains song so they can't be too bad!
The financial impact may be small, and it may affect some groups more than others. However I would argue that with the accompanying fall in the quality of life which is far more widesperead, one has to question why large scale immigration is still attempting to be sold as a benefit.
The pyramid scheme you describe is just that. It doesn't solve the problem of an increasing aging population it simply kicks the problem down the road. And when the recent enormous increase in immigrants are looking to retire and stop working, what then? How many do you suggest we allow into the country to support them? Another 4/5 million. Simply look at the size of the UK.
""Official data suggests that foreign nationals pay more in income taxes and national insurance contributions than they receive in tax credits and child benefit"."
Pretty sure those figures include all those foreign nationals working contracts in some of the best paid jobs in the city. For many years there has been a request to remove the contribution of working foreign nationals to be seperated from immigrants. The two are not the same.
The UK, unlike other EU countries has a non contributory system of welfare/benefits. Will the courts uphold treating EU nationals differently from UK nationals which would solve the problem? We don't have ID cards, but obviously there needs to be some register of people moving to the country if you are going to need to deport them by EU rules, not finding employment for instance. So perhaps an ID card for non UK citizens?
I seem to remember the goverment being defeated in the courts when the question of "Big Issue" sellers being considered in employment and therefore eligible for welfare. Currently 40/50% of homeless in London are foreign nationals.
The planet may well be ruined by chronic mismanagement. I would prefer the UK to not be first on the list. I live in the south of England, quality of life is being erroded by population increase.
The financial impact may be small, and it may affect some groups more than others. However I would argue that with the accompanying fall in the quality of life which is far more widesperead, one has to question why large scale immigration is still attempting to be sold as a benefit.
The pyramid scheme you describe is just that. It doesn't solve the problem of an increasing aging population it simply kicks the problem down the road. And when the recent enormous increase in immigrants are looking to retire and stop working, what then? How many do you suggest we allow into the country to support them? Another 4/5 million. Simply look at the size of the UK.
""Official data suggests that foreign nationals pay more in income taxes and national insurance contributions than they receive in tax credits and child benefit"."
Pretty sure those figures include all those foreign nationals working contracts in some of the best paid jobs in the city. For many years there has been a request to remove the contribution of working foreign nationals to be seperated from immigrants. The two are not the same.
The UK, unlike other EU countries has a non contributory system of welfare/benefits. Will the courts uphold treating EU nationals differently from UK nationals which would solve the problem? We don't have ID cards, but obviously there needs to be some register of people moving to the country if you are going to need to deport them by EU rules, not finding employment for instance. So perhaps an ID card for non UK citizens?
I seem to remember the goverment being defeated in the courts when the question of "Big Issue" sellers being considered in employment and therefore eligible for welfare. Currently 40/50% of homeless in London are foreign nationals.
The planet may well be ruined by chronic mismanagement. I would prefer the UK to not be first on the list. I live in the south of England, quality of life is being erroded by population increase.
I would imagine that being an island nation would present far more immigration problems than we have here in the States. Trump is basically confronting a non-existent problem for political gain here. Your problems there are real!
I think I am lumping them in with Sevendust and all I can think about is driving around in my friend's Camero after an Away Girl's basketball game. Also Drowning Pool probably played during that drive as well. It wasn't the golden age of music by a long shot.
I think I am lumping them in with Sevendust and all I can think about is driving around in my friend's Camero after an Away Girl's basketball game. Also Drowning Pool probably played during that drive as well. It wasn't the golden age of music by a long shot.
But the computer games were good!
Yes, they absolutely were, and my only regret is that I only had Macintosh's to play on, which kept me more on the Lucasarts Adventure/FPS/RTS side of things rather than the RPGs. I regret in retrospect it wasn't the Might and Magic series instead, though I would never trade the first two Monkey Island games for anything. Nothing will ever beat trapping Stan in his own used coffin.
Back to politics. I think it'd be a win-win scenario (as a conservative) if Roy Moore won but when he went into Congress every member of the Senate started hissing at him until he had to leave and resign like Glenn Close in Dangerous Liasons...
Likely outcome of that scenario: Several of the Republican senators who hiss get primaried from the right in 2018 by Roy Moore clones with full support from Trump.
Likely outcome of that scenario: Several of the Republican senators who hiss get primaried from the right in 2018 by Roy Moore clones with full support from Trump.
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
His Lord Dunsany Dream-world stuff is of an entirely different bent than the Mythos or run-of-the-mill Gothic horror. Though I remember liking "The Doom that Came to Sarnath", thought certainly not as well as I like something like "The Outsider" or, especially, "The Music of Erich Zann". To tie it in politically (so we don't go off topic) Lovecraft is a great discussion point for whether one can enjoy art when the artist holds views they find reprehensible. Obviously, everyone knows Lovecraft was a full-on racist (and certainly everyone knows about the name of the cat in "The Rats in the Walls"). I reconcile it with the fact that HP Lovecraft lived perhaps the most sheltered, hermetic life of any figure I have ever read about. He was raised in an almost aristocratic atmosphere by his aunts but it seemed to me his entire adult life was spent nearly destitute. I doubt he was a good dinner companion, or good companion in general.
Of course you have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. I couldn't listen to any of my favorite rock bands if I looked at them as role models. My favorite bands are Alice in Chains, Rage Against the Machine, Godsmack, Stone Temple Pilots, Black Sabbath (with Ozzy), Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, Ministry, Soundgarden, Fleetwood Mac, Jefferson Airplane, Billy Holiday, Pink Floyd, etc... Not exactly the best moral values in that bunch. With just a little change in my upbringing I'd probably be dead now from a drug overdose!
You do not have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. There's no mandate to do this. It is better to say that it is up to people how to decide whether they're willing to engage art attached to a problematic artist.
I'm not entirely consistent about this - some people I avoid their art entirely, some people I still enjoy it despite knowing their views. Mostly it depends on how they act upon those views.
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
His Lord Dunsany Dream-world stuff is of an entirely different bent than the Mythos or run-of-the-mill Gothic horror. Though I remember liking "The Doom that Came to Sarnath", thought certainly not as well as I like something like "The Outsider" or, especially, "The Music of Erich Zann". To tie it in politically (so we don't go off topic) Lovecraft is a great discussion point for whether one can enjoy art when the artist holds views they find reprehensible. Obviously, everyone knows Lovecraft was a full-on racist (and certainly everyone knows about the name of the cat in "The Rats in the Walls"). I reconcile it with the fact that HP Lovecraft lived perhaps the most sheltered, hermetic life of any figure I have ever read about. He was raised in an almost aristocratic atmosphere by his aunts but it seemed to me his entire adult life was spent nearly destitute. I doubt he was a good dinner companion, or good companion in general.
Of course you have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. I couldn't listen to any of my favorite rock bands if I looked at them as role models. My favorite bands are Alice in Chains, Rage Against the Machine, Godsmack, Stone Temple Pilots, Black Sabbath (with Ozzy), Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, Ministry, Soundgarden, Fleetwood Mac, Jefferson Airplane, Billy Holiday, Pink Floyd, etc... Not exactly the best moral values in that bunch. With just a little change in my upbringing I'd probably be dead now from a drug overdose!
You do not have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. There's no mandate to do this. It is better to say that it is up to people how to decide whether they're willing to engage art attached to a problematic artist.
I'm not entirely consistent about this - some people I avoid their art entirely, some people I still enjoy it despite knowing their views. Mostly it depends on how they act upon those views.
If you enjoy it but ignore it you're not being true to yourself in my opinion. If I enjoy the art, whether it be music, paintings, movies, stories, whatever, I can ignore the source. The scientist in me is intrigued by figuring out what draws me to it. That's part of the mystery of art in general. It's the one thing I can't quantify with logic and I'm ok with that...
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
His Lord Dunsany Dream-world stuff is of an entirely different bent than the Mythos or run-of-the-mill Gothic horror. Though I remember liking "The Doom that Came to Sarnath", thought certainly not as well as I like something like "The Outsider" or, especially, "The Music of Erich Zann". To tie it in politically (so we don't go off topic) Lovecraft is a great discussion point for whether one can enjoy art when the artist holds views they find reprehensible. Obviously, everyone knows Lovecraft was a full-on racist (and certainly everyone knows about the name of the cat in "The Rats in the Walls"). I reconcile it with the fact that HP Lovecraft lived perhaps the most sheltered, hermetic life of any figure I have ever read about. He was raised in an almost aristocratic atmosphere by his aunts but it seemed to me his entire adult life was spent nearly destitute. I doubt he was a good dinner companion, or good companion in general.
Of course you have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. I couldn't listen to any of my favorite rock bands if I looked at them as role models. My favorite bands are Alice in Chains, Rage Against the Machine, Godsmack, Stone Temple Pilots, Black Sabbath (with Ozzy), Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, Ministry, Soundgarden, Fleetwood Mac, Jefferson Airplane, Billy Holiday, Pink Floyd, etc... Not exactly the best moral values in that bunch. With just a little change in my upbringing I'd probably be dead now from a drug overdose!
You do not have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. There's no mandate to do this. It is better to say that it is up to people how to decide whether they're willing to engage art attached to a problematic artist.
I'm not entirely consistent about this - some people I avoid their art entirely, some people I still enjoy it despite knowing their views. Mostly it depends on how they act upon those views.
If you enjoy it but ignore it you're not being true to yourself in my opinion. If I enjoy the art, whether it be music, paintings, movies, stories, whatever, I can ignore the source. The scientist in me is intrigued by figuring out what draws me to it. That's part of the mystery of art in general. It's the one thing I can't quantify with logic and I'm ok with that...
I find that when it comes to certain people, knowing what they're like and what they do makes it difficult to enjoy their art.
There's also a lot of art I enjoy despite the creator.
The difference, I think, is how they acted on and implemented their views in the real world.
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
His Lord Dunsany Dream-world stuff is of an entirely different bent than the Mythos or run-of-the-mill Gothic horror. Though I remember liking "The Doom that Came to Sarnath", thought certainly not as well as I like something like "The Outsider" or, especially, "The Music of Erich Zann". To tie it in politically (so we don't go off topic) Lovecraft is a great discussion point for whether one can enjoy art when the artist holds views they find reprehensible. Obviously, everyone knows Lovecraft was a full-on racist (and certainly everyone knows about the name of the cat in "The Rats in the Walls"). I reconcile it with the fact that HP Lovecraft lived perhaps the most sheltered, hermetic life of any figure I have ever read about. He was raised in an almost aristocratic atmosphere by his aunts but it seemed to me his entire adult life was spent nearly destitute. I doubt he was a good dinner companion, or good companion in general.
Of course you have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. I couldn't listen to any of my favorite rock bands if I looked at them as role models. My favorite bands are Alice in Chains, Rage Against the Machine, Godsmack, Stone Temple Pilots, Black Sabbath (with Ozzy), Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, Ministry, Soundgarden, Fleetwood Mac, Jefferson Airplane, Billy Holiday, Pink Floyd, etc... Not exactly the best moral values in that bunch. With just a little change in my upbringing I'd probably be dead now from a drug overdose!
You do not have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. There's no mandate to do this. It is better to say that it is up to people how to decide whether they're willing to engage art attached to a problematic artist.
I'm not entirely consistent about this - some people I avoid their art entirely, some people I still enjoy it despite knowing their views. Mostly it depends on how they act upon those views.
If you enjoy it but ignore it you're not being true to yourself in my opinion. If I enjoy the art, whether it be music, paintings, movies, stories, whatever, I can ignore the source. The scientist in me is intrigued by figuring out what draws me to it. That's part of the mystery of art in general. It's the one thing I can't quantify with logic and I'm ok with that...
I find that when it comes to certain people, knowing what they're like and what they do makes it difficult to enjoy their art.
There's also a lot of art I enjoy despite the creator.
Art is usually giving you a glimpse into the creator's soul in some way or another. Reading Mein Kampf doesn't make you Hitler, but it does give you a glimpse of what was going on in his mind. Appreciating the architecture of the Colliseum doesn't make you a bloodthirsty fan of duels to the death but it can still bring a feeling of awe about the grandeur of it. Reading and enjoying Lovecraft doesn't make you a racist but it can give a perspective of how things were in the early 1900's. Maybe my love of history just gives me a sense of perspective but I don't think there's any art you can experience that can fundamentally change who you are as a person.
Well, let's take Gary Glitter for instance. Gary Glitter is a pedophile. A song of Gary Glitter's that I have always kind of liked (because it sounds awesome) takes on entirely new meaning lyrics-wise when you know what he was like in real-life. It's impossible for me to ignore that for more than 30 seconds even when listening to it. But I still kind of like the song, because it is a glam-rock template and I love '70s glam like T. Rex, Mott the Hoople and David Bowie. Roman Polanski is another problem. I think "The Pianist" is one of the best movies I have ever seen. And it never would have been made if he had been brought to justice. So yeah, this is a real issue for sure.
Then again, let's get real here. Jimmy Page traveled all around the world with a 14-year old concubine named Lori Maddox. It is inconceivable to me that rock stars of the '70s and '80s didn't sleep with HUNDREDS of underage girls. But that somehow does seem different than Roy Moore literally stalking shopping malls for vulnerable girls, acting like an actual predator.
Well, let's take Gary Glitter for instance. Gary Glitter is a pedophile. A song of Gary Glitter's that I have always kind of liked (because it sounds awesome) takes on entirely new meaning lyrics-wise when you know what he was like in real-life. It's impossible for me to ignore that for more than 30 seconds even when listening to it. But I still kind of like the song, because it is a glam-rock template and I love '70s glam like T. Rex, Mott the Hoople and David Bowie. Roman Polanski is another problem. I think "The Pianist" is one of the best movies I have ever seen. And it never would have been made if he had been brought to justice. So yeah, this is a real issue for sure.
I'm with you bro. I really enjoyed Piers Anthony's Xanth novels when I was in college. I read every one of them and eagerly anticipated every new book. He turned out a book called Firefly in the 90's that I bought and read. It was a really disturbing story about a pedophile and a 10 year old girl that I found repulsive. I finished that book and it didn't affect me too much but I found that I lost the desire to read any more of his novels. I found out much later that he really is a pedophile (maybe not overtly but he's a proponent of a far younger age of consent than I'm comfortable with). So yeah, I guess I do draw a line in the sand with regards to art...
Man, Herbert West was my first Lovecraft story. Still remember that one fondly.
My first was The Doom that Came to Sarnath. I was into Tolkien at the time and Lovecraft's style of writing struck me as very similar with the old English and the almost poetic prose. The Cats of Ulthar really got me hooked since I'm a cat person and was also into Egyptian mythology at the time. Ah, the good old days...
His Lord Dunsany Dream-world stuff is of an entirely different bent than the Mythos or run-of-the-mill Gothic horror. Though I remember liking "The Doom that Came to Sarnath", thought certainly not as well as I like something like "The Outsider" or, especially, "The Music of Erich Zann". To tie it in politically (so we don't go off topic) Lovecraft is a great discussion point for whether one can enjoy art when the artist holds views they find reprehensible. Obviously, everyone knows Lovecraft was a full-on racist (and certainly everyone knows about the name of the cat in "The Rats in the Walls"). I reconcile it with the fact that HP Lovecraft lived perhaps the most sheltered, hermetic life of any figure I have ever read about. He was raised in an almost aristocratic atmosphere by his aunts but it seemed to me his entire adult life was spent nearly destitute. I doubt he was a good dinner companion, or good companion in general.
Of course you have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. I couldn't listen to any of my favorite rock bands if I looked at them as role models. My favorite bands are Alice in Chains, Rage Against the Machine, Godsmack, Stone Temple Pilots, Black Sabbath (with Ozzy), Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, Ministry, Soundgarden, Fleetwood Mac, Jefferson Airplane, Billy Holiday, Pink Floyd, etc... Not exactly the best moral values in that bunch. With just a little change in my upbringing I'd probably be dead now from a drug overdose!
You do not have to ignore the person when you enjoy the art. There's no mandate to do this. It is better to say that it is up to people how to decide whether they're willing to engage art attached to a problematic artist.
I'm not entirely consistent about this - some people I avoid their art entirely, some people I still enjoy it despite knowing their views. Mostly it depends on how they act upon those views.
If you enjoy it but ignore it you're not being true to yourself in my opinion. If I enjoy the art, whether it be music, paintings, movies, stories, whatever, I can ignore the source. The scientist in me is intrigued by figuring out what draws me to it. That's part of the mystery of art in general. It's the one thing I can't quantify with logic and I'm ok with that...
I find that when it comes to certain people, knowing what they're like and what they do makes it difficult to enjoy their art.
There's also a lot of art I enjoy despite the creator.
Art is usually giving you a glimpse into the creator's soul in some way or another. Reading Mein Kampf doesn't make you Hitler, but it does give you a glimpse of what was going on in his mind. Appreciating the architecture of the Colliseum doesn't make you a bloodthirsty fan of duels to the death but it can still bring a feeling of awe about the grandeur of it. Reading and enjoying Lovecraft doesn't make you a racist but it can give a perspective of how things were in the early 1900's. Maybe my love of history just gives me a sense of perspective but I don't think there's any art you can experience that can fundamentally change who you are as a person.
I never said that it would change who I am as a person.
Reading Lovecraft won't make me a racist, although I would argue that he was significantly more racist than was typical for his time. Appreciating problematic art won't make me problematic. I know this. People are allowed to appreciate whatever art they want, I'm not saying otherwise.
However, I don't appreciate some art because the person who created it has done things that I do not wish to support. This does not mean I lack perspective, it means I have a perspective different from yours.
I'm not arguing you or anyone else should avoid any art. I'm simply saying there are good reasons for people to avoid art if they so choose. There's so much art that avoiding some of it doesn't mean missing out on anything.
Well, let's take Gary Glitter for instance. Gary Glitter is a pedophile. A song of Gary Glitter's that I have always kind of liked (because it sounds awesome) takes on entirely new meaning lyrics-wise when you know what he was like in real-life. It's impossible for me to ignore that for more than 30 seconds even when listening to it. But I still kind of like the song, because it is a glam-rock template and I love '70s glam like T. Rex, Mott the Hoople and David Bowie. Roman Polanski is another problem. I think "The Pianist" is one of the best movies I have ever seen. And it never would have been made if he had been brought to justice. So yeah, this is a real issue for sure.
I'm with you bro. I really enjoyed Piers Anthony's Xanth novels when I was in college. I read every one of them and eagerly anticipated every new book. He turned out a book called Firefly in the 90's that I bought and read. It was a really disturbing story about a pedophile and a 10 year old girl that I found repulsive. I finished that book and it didn't affect me too much but I found that I lost the desire to read any more of his novels. I found out much layer that he really is a pedophile (maybe not overtly but he's a proponent of a far younger age of consent than I'm comfortable with). So yeah, I guess I do draw a line in the sand with regards to art...
I don't know if you ever watched the movie "Kids" back in the '90s, but it was famously controversial for putting it's young stars in a VERY mature and blue storyline. The director's follow-up movie was actually amazing, called "Bully" but it was also entirely clear to me that the director was obsessed with filming his barely legal actors and actresses in the most salacious scenes possible. Not that they were necessary to the film, but that he got off on filming them. It is evident when you watch the movie. And it's weird. They weren't underage, but as far as the movie plot went, they were.
Comments
https://cthulhuforamerica.com/
http://sacred-texts.com/neu/dun/tbow/tbow11.htm
The thing is, I'm not sure how big the news of one more Al Franken groping allegation would have been this morning if half a dozen female Senators hadn't demanded his resignation within 30 minutes of each other. They clearly saw it and orchestrated the move. The bet is that the public actually is really sickened by all these sexual assault and harassment cases coming out and they made the calculation that coming down as the party who stands up to it is where they want to be. In the short term, the GOP gains power because they won't hold their own accountable. Whether that works in the long-run is a story yet to be written.
Thank you for your long and thoughtful reply.
The financial impact may be small, and it may affect some groups more than others. However I would argue that with the accompanying fall in the quality of life which is far more widesperead, one has to question why large scale immigration is still attempting to be sold as a benefit.
The pyramid scheme you describe is just that. It doesn't solve the problem of an increasing aging population it simply kicks the problem down the road. And when the recent enormous increase in immigrants are looking to retire and stop working, what then? How many do you suggest we allow into the country to support them? Another 4/5 million.
Simply look at the size of the UK.
""Official data suggests that foreign nationals pay more in income taxes and national insurance contributions than they receive in tax credits and child benefit"."
Pretty sure those figures include all those foreign nationals working contracts in some of the best paid jobs in the city. For many years there has been a request to remove the contribution of working foreign nationals to be seperated from immigrants.
The two are not the same.
The UK, unlike other EU countries has a non contributory system of welfare/benefits.
Will the courts uphold treating EU nationals differently from UK nationals which would solve the problem?
We don't have ID cards, but obviously there needs to be some register of people moving to the country if you are going to need to deport them by EU rules, not finding employment for instance.
So perhaps an ID card for non UK citizens?
I seem to remember the goverment being defeated in the courts when the question of "Big Issue" sellers being considered in employment and therefore eligible for welfare.
Currently 40/50% of homeless in London are foreign nationals.
The planet may well be ruined by chronic mismanagement. I would prefer the UK to not be first on the list. I live in the south of England, quality of life is being erroded by population increase.
I'm not entirely consistent about this - some people I avoid their art entirely, some people I still enjoy it despite knowing their views. Mostly it depends on how they act upon those views.
There's also a lot of art I enjoy despite the creator.
The difference, I think, is how they acted on and implemented their views in the real world.
Then again, let's get real here. Jimmy Page traveled all around the world with a 14-year old concubine named Lori Maddox. It is inconceivable to me that rock stars of the '70s and '80s didn't sleep with HUNDREDS of underage girls. But that somehow does seem different than Roy Moore literally stalking shopping malls for vulnerable girls, acting like an actual predator.
Reading Lovecraft won't make me a racist, although I would argue that he was significantly more racist than was typical for his time. Appreciating problematic art won't make me problematic. I know this. People are allowed to appreciate whatever art they want, I'm not saying otherwise.
However, I don't appreciate some art because the person who created it has done things that I do not wish to support. This does not mean I lack perspective, it means I have a perspective different from yours.
I'm not arguing you or anyone else should avoid any art. I'm simply saying there are good reasons for people to avoid art if they so choose. There's so much art that avoiding some of it doesn't mean missing out on anything.