Author Topic: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?  (Read 6889 times)

Offline genero81

  • Jedi Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 516
  • Help me grow in knowledge
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #30 on: September 08, 2017, 03:57:41 PM »
Some years back, Ark heard about a famous Polish filmmaker, ‌Krzysztof Kieślowski, who made a set of famous Polish films called "The Decalogue".  So, he was enthusiastic about all of us sitting down and watching some famous Polish movies by famous Polish guy. He obtained copies...

We all agreed... and began to watch. 

I think that it was about the third or 4th of the 10 that NONE of us, not even Ark, could bear to watch another minute of those films. 

They weren't bad.  In fact, they were very good, intense and realistic in a way that sucked you in.  But the reality you were sucked into was so horrific that when it was over, you felt as though you had been put on the rack and tortured. 

One of the things that is implicit in artistic expression is dividing beautiful from ugly.  These films were everything that is ugly, piled to heaven.

And that is what this Sigur Ros video seems to be also.  And frankly, the ridiculous words at the end about love, and the appearance of a baby seem to me to be rather more like a programming maneuver than an honest part of the video.


It's interesting for me because there was a time in my life that felt and looked a whole lot like that right down to the desert landscape. And one could make the argument that I've been born again, as it turned out to be one experience among many. Several weeks ago I was waiting on a group of six and this one lady was saying something to me that I wasn't catching at first because she was speaking softly. She repeated it until I heard her. She said; "you carry joy." At first I just thought she was a strange lady who likes to say strange things, but upon reflection I think there's some truth there. My life is pretty unbelievable right now. Not everyday is hats and horns but overall it's quite amazing! FWIW
"The voice of seeing is a most mysterious inexplicable thing." Carlos Castaneda

Offline Azur

  • Dagobah Resident
  • *******
  • Posts: 906
  • Un peu plus haut, Un peu plus loin
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #31 on: September 08, 2017, 06:30:48 PM »
And that is what this Sigur Ros video seems to be also.  And frankly, the ridiculous words at the end about love, and the appearance of a baby seem to me to be rather more like a programming maneuver than an honest part of the video.

That's exactly what struck me too: "You are channeled along this miserable subjective life, and here's the only outcome".

Rinse, repeat, you're helpless to change this cycle. That's the subliminal message.

 :rolleyes:
"What concerns me is not the way things are, but rather the way people think things are"  -- Epictetus AD 55-c.135

Light your candle before Night, or it takes you -- Greek saying

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield. -- Tennyson

Children of tomorrow live in the tears that fall today. -- Butler

“We are going to do a terrible thing to you. We are going to deprive you of an enemy.” -- Georgi Arbatov

Online H2O

  • Jedi Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 409
  • So you can talk to water? Yes.
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #32 on: September 08, 2017, 06:52:49 PM »
Some years back, Ark heard about a famous Polish filmmaker, ‌Krzysztof Kieślowski, who made a set of famous Polish films called "The Decalogue".  So, he was enthusiastic about all of us sitting down and watching some famous Polish movies by famous Polish guy. He obtained copies...

We all agreed... and began to watch. 

I think that it was about the third or 4th of the 10 that NONE of us, not even Ark, could bear to watch another minute of those films. 

They weren't bad.  In fact, they were very good, intense and realistic in a way that sucked you in.  But the reality you were sucked into was so horrific that when it was over, you felt as though you had been put on the rack and tortured. 

One of the things that is implicit in artistic expression is dividing beautiful from ugly.  These films were everything that is ugly, piled to heaven.

And that is what this Sigur Ros video seems to be also.  And frankly, the ridiculous words at the end about love, and the appearance of a baby seem to me to be rather more like a programming maneuver than an honest part of the video.

Is there not a danger, when some of these artistic endeavors open the door, so to speak, to your emotions, that you are vulnerable, if not sufficiently aware, for negative ideas to enter in the opened door? 

Is this not a common theme lately, kind of like the case where our media bombards you with negative images, opens the door to your mind and emotions, then inserts their own ideas in?

What could be called postmodern art, movies, writings are much more subtle than that, but seem to work along the same principle.

Or am I off base here?

(It reminded me of what Laura was talking about in another thread about Reiki, where it was said, the crown chakra is opened for the attunement, but then must be closed, so that nothing untoward would enter afterward.)
« Last Edit: September 08, 2017, 07:00:27 PM by Hello H2O »

Offline Adaryn

  • SuperModerator
  • ********
  • Posts: 4,835
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #33 on: September 08, 2017, 10:56:23 PM »
Yes, that what I thought too... and it made me think about how it shows the direction in which art is going... I mean, for me, the idea of art is to express something in order to convey a message, which means, to communicate and connect with other human beings. In this new art, there's no intention of connecting with another human being but just evoking feelings...
But isn't evoking feelings connecting

In a personal interaction, yes.  In a propagated "art form" of questionable value, one has to wonder what the agenda is.

Songs, movies, paintings and any kind of art can evoke strong and intense feelings, but for me, it doesn't necessarily mean those feelings will be of the positive, 'connecting' kind. It can be a negative 'connection' - evoking despair, depression, negative emotions of the contractile kind that don't make you want to reach out to others, but that make you stew in your own bubble, dreaming that you're connecting - so there you have, people feeling a bit more depressed and melancholic after watching a sad/'depressingly realistic' piece of art about the human condition, and then what? Does the artist offer a solution? Is Hope present? The only positive/productive thing that might come out of it is if such art is taken as a basis for discussion about the potential effect it can have on us. Like what you've all been doing here, in this thread :-) Distancing ourselves from the feelings triggered by such art, and trying to understand why it makes us feel that way, what was the intent of the artist, their possible conscious (or unconscious) agenda.

I try to assess art through the type of feeling (the 'flavour' of it) it evokes in me and where those feelings lead to, where they take me. A song can be aesthetically "beautiful" yet leave me empty, increasing feelings of loneliness and isolation. The emotions triggered are more of the nebulous kind, they're vague, unclear. In that sense, they're "dirty'. They'll increase my natural tendencies to dissociate, withdraw and not truly connect. They're not conducive to positive action, to growth.
To me, a connecting type of art feels clear, clean and neat. It appeals to higher emotions. It feels more universal, less personal/self-centered - though it can take on a personal meaning for me, but it makes me feel closer to Humanity, the emotions evoked are of the 'warm' kind, integrated into the Universal human experience. They're expansive and broaden my horizon, give me hope.
The emotions are clean, unambiguous. The content can be sad, but it serves a purpose, there's meaning behind it, even if the form is not particularly explicit/more symbolic. Basically I'd say any art that makes you wanna go out there and connect to others in a positive way is 'good'; if feeds your soul. What's the point of a "deeply beautiful" piece of art that makes you feel depressed and beaten down, that makes you drift into melancholy, making you 'wallow' in your own bubble ("woe is us, human condition is really bleak")? It's not productive, it leads to nowhere.

Quote from: Z
If we agree this video is example of such art, can you give me example of art( in any form) that you find exactly opposite - i.e utilizing "the common language of expression".

I know the question was not addressed to me, but personally, this song and the video that goes with it evoke strong emotions in me (to the point of making me cry every time). But those emotions are uplifiting. The lyrics are objectively beautiful (clean and clear), they have meaning. I can't really explain why it makes me feel so emotional. It seems that it evokes similar emotions in a lot of people (judging by the comments on YouTube), whatever their background may be (common language of expression?). Musically, it might not be to everybody's taste, of course. Some may find it silly or too 'simple'. Yet I find there's something magical and deeply touching in that song/music video. In a way, I feel more 'whole' when I listen to it. That was just to give an example, and my 2 cents.
To love you must know.

Offline Nima

  • Jedi Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 456
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #34 on: September 09, 2017, 02:27:43 AM »
I was just thinking how much has Hollywood and ponerized establishment taken from the film in general as an art medium. 
IMHO the sole purpose of of art is to feed the soul.
All of the Sigur Ros mystery film experiment series is extraordinary but this short film has touched me so deeply, made me extremely sad to the point of crying and in the same time filled me with hope for humanity. So I had to share it...

https://youtu.be/KPBLTlLTFHA

Hum, I just don't get this type of "art". Even after reading your interpretation I find the video annoying. The music also kind of bugs me. I agree with others that the art video is very unrooted.

I like more rooted "art" like the one below:


https://youtu.be/WjqiU5FgsYc
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance"-Confucius.

Offline Yas

  • The Living Force
  • ********
  • Posts: 1,969
  • -Together we stand, divided we fall- (pink floyd)
    • es.sott.net
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #35 on: September 09, 2017, 02:27:36 PM »
Better yet, you spend some time reading Collingwood's "Speculum Mentis".  You may learn a thing or two about art, artists, and artistic expression.

Sounds like a very interesting book, thanks.

Yes, that what I thought too... and it made me think about how it shows the direction in which art is going... I mean, for me, the idea of art is to express something in order to convey a message, which means, to communicate and connect with other human beings. In this new art, there's no intention of connecting with another human being but just evoking feelings...
But isn't evoking feelings connecting

In a personal interaction, yes.  In a propagated "art form" of questionable value, one has to wonder what the agenda is.

Songs, movies, paintings and any kind of art can evoke strong and intense feelings, but for me, it doesn't necessarily mean those feelings will be of the positive, 'connecting' kind. It can be a negative 'connection' - evoking despair, depression, negative emotions of the contractile kind that don't make you want to reach out to others, but that make you stew in your own bubble, dreaming that you're connecting - so there you have, people feeling a bit more depressed and melancholic after watching a sad/'depressingly realistic' piece of art about the human condition, and then what? Does the artist offer a solution? Is Hope present? The only positive/productive thing that might come out of it is if such art is taken as a basis for discussion about the potential effect it can have on us. Like what you've all been doing here, in this thread :-) Distancing ourselves from the feelings triggered by such art, and trying to understand why it makes us feel that way, what was the intent of the artist, their possible conscious (or unconscious) agenda.

I try to assess art through the type of feeling (the 'flavour' of it) it evokes in me and where those feelings lead to, where they take me. A song can be aesthetically "beautiful" yet leave me empty, increasing feelings of loneliness and isolation. The emotions triggered are more of the nebulous kind, they're vague, unclear. In that sense, they're "dirty'. They'll increase my natural tendencies to dissociate, withdraw and not truly connect. They're not conducive to positive action, to growth.
To me, a connecting type of art feels clear, clean and neat. It appeals to higher emotions. It feels more universal, less personal/self-centered - though it can take on a personal meaning for me, but it makes me feel closer to Humanity, the emotions evoked are of the 'warm' kind, integrated into the Universal human experience. They're expansive and broaden my horizon, give me hope.
The emotions are clean, unambiguous. The content can be sad, but it serves a purpose, there's meaning behind it, even if the form is not particularly explicit/more symbolic. Basically I'd say any art that makes you wanna go out there and connect to others in a positive way is 'good'; if feeds your soul. What's the point of a "deeply beautiful" piece of art that makes you feel depressed and beaten down, that makes you drift into melancholy, making you 'wallow' in your own bubble ("woe is us, human condition is really bleak")? It's not productive, it leads to nowhere.

Yes! You've put in words what I think precisely. Also, it's not always that the music/art we encounter falls into the postmodernist idea of "not wanting to direct the spectator's subjectivity", sometimes there is a clear intention and message, but is that message conducive to something that can help other people in some way or another? There's no problem with sad music, but do they offer a perspective that helps us understand sadness and maybe overcome it, or does it just saddens more and tells us about being sad and staying so sad in our little world?

I don't mean that art always has to be clear like that. I mean, many classical pieces don't really have such a clear meaning and intention, but they can somehow convey meaning, bring up emotions and these emotions can also move us in a direction or another...

Quote from: Z
If we agree this video is example of such art, can you give me example of art( in any form) that you find exactly opposite - i.e utilizing "the common language of expression".

I know the question was not addressed to me, but personally, this song and the video that goes with it evoke strong emotions in me (to the point of making me cry every time). But those emotions are uplifiting. The lyrics are objectively beautiful (clean and clear), they have meaning. I can't really explain why it makes me feel so emotional. It seems that it evokes similar emotions in a lot of people (judging by the comments on YouTube), whatever their background may be (common language of expression?). Musically, it might not be to everybody's taste, of course. Some may find it silly or too 'simple'. Yet I find there's something magical and deeply touching in that song/music video. In a way, I feel more 'whole' when I listen to it. That was just to give an example, and my 2 cents.

I didn't know that band and I liked the music and video.

Z, I want to clarify that I myself don't know that "common language of expression" yet. I'm very interested in it, though. I think that the study of Jungian archetypes can help to describe something about this and help me understand a bit more about this language that is meaningful to most people and why this is so. Be it certain melodies, which are more abstract, or lyrics, poetry and literature, which are more explicit, or pictures, photography or many different ways of expression... I'm still just exploring this.

Since you asked for an example, I would say that it's very hard for me to say if a piece of music is objectively good and conveys a positive message, because I'm not a music expert and so, ultimately, I base my assessment mostly in how it makes me (and others) feel (as described above by Adaryn) or the message it's conveyed in it (as I understand it). I particularly like a Cuban singer called Silvio Rodriguez in respect to music that has a clear message put beautifully in poetry accompanied by melodies (I don't like all of his songs either, but many) and then one of my favourites is Vivaldi's "The Four Seasons". I know, it's a cliché maybe, but I've always found awe in nature and this symphony always has a great impact in me. I also find it amazing how Vivaldi wanted to make it very clear in terms of what each part is transmitting. And it's just beautiful. Summer and Winter are my favourites.

I wanted to add something that I thought while reading Adaryn's post. Some music can be harsh too and represent some form of despair of the human condition, yet, somehow, what they transmit seems to be more of a "wake up call". I'm thinking of Pink Floyd's Time, for example. This music gives a proverbial slap on the face and talks about something that affects many people everywhere and it doesn't transmit a lot of hope, OSIT, yet, the overall sensation it gives is "wake up!!!", not "Yeah, this is awful but stay there and continue to wallow in the awfulness of it all." I don't know, that's how I see it at least.

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.
(Reinhold Niebuhr)

"All we can do is discipline ourselves to the point where they will not touch us." (Don Juan)

“Giving is more joyous than receiving, not because it is a deprivation, but because in the act of giving lies the expression of my aliveness.” (Erich Fromm, The Art of Loving)

Offline Laura

  • Administrator
  • ********
  • Posts: 32,418
    • http://www.laura-knight-jadczyk.com
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #36 on: September 09, 2017, 07:09:02 PM »

Collingwood describes the "state of art" in which children operate as "artists" and how they then move to the next stage: religious. And then, finally, grow up into the "scientific" state.  (And this is a very rough description.)   But it cycles and has cycles within the cycles and combinations.  The next major art/religious/science cycle starts roughly at puberty.  The very young child and the pubescent child is an "artist" and artistic expression has a profound effect on him or her.  That is why, I suspect, that the music we are exposed to at that age, or at that point in our "cycles" stays with us all our lives, more or less.  And that's probably why people have different musical "tastes".  It's a kind of imprinting. 

Gurdjieff maintained that there was such a thing as "objective art" and music, but I'm not entirely sure that is true. Especially after reading Collingwood.  It really is a profound discussion with a lot of interesting implications.  He also argues it very convincingly.

Sure, the kind of art and music a person like may reveal something about them, but what it reveals is more likely to be about the states and environment while in those states when they were at a certain point in their "cycle" as described above.  You could call it a time of imprint vulnerability.  A person very attached to heavy metal "music" may have gotten that way because they went through rough times and their environment was not secure and the music was favored by their "in group" and thus gave them comfort.  So, forever after, even if they may grow to like other music a bit, they will probably still be attached to their heavy metal for emotional reasons. So I think it doesn't mean they are dark and mechanical and whatever heavy metal evokes for other people, it may just mean a connection to something that felt good to them.

That's my new thinking on it anyway. 

Of course, it doesn't change the fact that some music originates in certain "artistic circles" that seek deliberately to evoke ugliness and discordance and that such music and art can affect a person's frequency resonance vibration and limit their receivership capacity to higher vibrations but I think we don't know exactly what that kind of "good music" might be.  The Cs have given a few hints here and there.  They didn't like "Creation Chant", a Native American drumming/chanting thing.  They liked Riverdance.  They like some Pink Floyd.  They mentioned melodic madrigal type music as being beneficial.  But not much beyond that. 

If Collingwood is onto something, music or art that makes you THINK rather than FEEL would be more objective.
He who learns must suffer
And even in our sleep pain that cannot forget
Falls drop by drop upon the heart,
And in our own despair, against our will,
Comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.
Agamemnon, Aeschylus

Offline Cleo

  • Jedi Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 598
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #37 on: September 10, 2017, 08:49:16 AM »
What stands out to me after having watched the Sigur Ros music video is the fact that I started to feel increasingly sad towards the end of it after initially feeling more neutral and perplexed. I had read others thoughts about the video in this thread before watching it, so I question how much that might've influenced my perception and reaction overall. And good question on its meaning..

Well, those are some of the thoughts when looking at the video, but I've always been a bit "dense" to understand this type of art. I also liked the last phrase, but then I couldn't understand what the message was exactly, and that's not something new with Sigur Ros... not because they sing in another language, but because they actually invent words that don't exist in any language.

I wasn't aware that the group invents the words to most if not all of their songs. The one song of Sigur Ros's btw, that I find especially beautiful sounding is the following:


https://youtu.be/0QM1QdRpFxU

Curious that the title of the above song is 'Njósnavélin' or 'the nothing song'..hadn't paid much attention to the title really or even considered the exact meaning of the lyrics till reading this thread. Have since been thinking about how often I might do this where I listen to a song over and over based on how pleasing to the ear and emotions it is..without really considering what it's actually saying, if anything.

I also found this on band's website about their 'invented language':
 
Quote from: https://sigur-ros.co.uk/band/faq.php#07
what language does jónsi sing in?
on von, ágætis byrjun and takk, jónsi sang most songs in icelandic but a few of the songs were sung in 'hopelandic'. all of the vocals ( ) are however in hopelandic. hopelandic (vonlenska in icelandic) is the 'invented language' in which jónsi sings before lyrics are written to the vocals. it's of course not an actual language by definition (no vocabulary, grammar, etc.), it's rather a form of gibberish vocals that fits to the music and acts as another instrument. jónsi likens it with what singers sometimes do when they've decided on the melody but haven't written the lyrics yet. many languages were considered to be used on ( ), including english, but they decided on hopelandic. hopelandic (vonlenska) got its name from first song which jónsi sang it on, hope (von). tracks 7-9 on takk are in hopelandic.

Offline Azur

  • Dagobah Resident
  • *******
  • Posts: 906
  • Un peu plus haut, Un peu plus loin
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #38 on: September 10, 2017, 02:01:52 PM »

Collingwood describes the "state of art" in which children operate as "artists" and how they then move to the next stage: religious. And then, finally, grow up into the "scientific" state.  (And this is a very rough description.)   But it cycles and has cycles within the cycles and combinations.  The next major art/religious/science cycle starts roughly at puberty.  The very young child and the pubescent child is an "artist" and artistic expression has a profound effect on him or her. 

[...]

Quote
That is why, I suspect, that the music we are exposed to at that age, or at that point in our "cycles" stays with us all our lives, more or less.  And that's probably why people have different musical "tastes".  It's a kind of imprinting. 

Touché.

It is also an anchor for self-remembering for that period in your life. Yes, that's subjective.

Quote

Gurdjieff maintained that there was such a thing as "objective art" and music, but I'm not entirely sure that is true. Especially after reading Collingwood.  It really is a profound discussion with a lot of interesting implications.  He also argues it very convincingly.


Quote
Sure, the kind of art and music a person like may reveal something about them, but what it reveals is more likely to be about the states and environment while in those states when they were at a certain point in their "cycle" as described above.  You could call it a time of imprint vulnerability.  A person very attached to heavy metal "music" may have gotten that way because they went through rough times and their environment was not secure and the music was favored by their "in group" and thus gave them comfort.  So, forever after, even if they may grow to like other music a bit, they will probably still be attached to their heavy metal for emotional reasons. So I think it doesn't mean they are dark and mechanical and whatever heavy metal evokes for other people, it may just mean a connection to something that felt good to them.

That's my new thinking on it anyway. 



And then again, it might not simply be about the music. Until later in life, I revisited so many songs/music that I used to hear when I was younger, and I'd float along with it, remembering those golden times.

That was until I looked at what those songs were actually saying: the lyrics were only about getting laid or protecting the lady that they were trying to lay.

Not all were like that, but too many.

Many are now poison, I can't hear the music anymore, which is an inversion.

Quote
Of course, it doesn't change the fact that some music originates in certain "artistic circles" that seek deliberately to evoke ugliness and discordance and that such music and art can affect a person's frequency resonance vibration and limit their receivership capacity to higher vibrations but I think we don't know exactly what that kind of "good music" might be.  The Cs have given a few hints here and there.  They didn't like "Creation Chant", a Native American drumming/chanting thing.  They liked Riverdance.  They like some Pink Floyd.  They mentioned melodic madrigal type music as being beneficial.  But not much beyond that. 

If Collingwood is onto something, music or art that makes you THINK rather than FEEL would be more objective.

One of the things I almost proposed, but didn't with this video is watching it without sound. It looks dismal without the sucker music.

On another note, some of the music I've posted, I wished to post without video but couldn't (stuff only found on YT), because it has the same effect, it takes away from the one sense it was meant for.
"What concerns me is not the way things are, but rather the way people think things are"  -- Epictetus AD 55-c.135

Light your candle before Night, or it takes you -- Greek saying

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield. -- Tennyson

Children of tomorrow live in the tears that fall today. -- Butler

“We are going to do a terrible thing to you. We are going to deprive you of an enemy.” -- Georgi Arbatov

Offline Z

  • The Living Force
  • ********
  • Posts: 4,081
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #39 on: September 13, 2017, 08:59:59 AM »
The one song of Sigur Ros's btw, that I find especially beautiful sounding is the following:
then you might like this version

https://youtu.be/GsgUkahAdWg
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. [Mexican proverb]

Offline Divide By Zero

  • The Living Force
  • ********
  • Posts: 1,700
  • Can the Matrix Divide by Zero?
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #40 on: September 14, 2017, 01:52:15 AM »

Collingwood describes the "state of art" in which children operate as "artists" and how they then move to the next stage: religious. And then, finally, grow up into the "scientific" state.  (And this is a very rough description.)   But it cycles and has cycles within the cycles and combinations.  The next major art/religious/science cycle starts roughly at puberty.  The very young child and the pubescent child is an "artist" and artistic expression has a profound effect on him or her.  That is why, I suspect, that the music we are exposed to at that age, or at that point in our "cycles" stays with us all our lives, more or less.  And that's probably why people have different musical "tastes".  It's a kind of imprinting. 

Gurdjieff maintained that there was such a thing as "objective art" and music, but I'm not entirely sure that is true. Especially after reading Collingwood.  It really is a profound discussion with a lot of interesting implications.  He also argues it very convincingly.

Sure, the kind of art and music a person like may reveal something about them, but what it reveals is more likely to be about the states and environment while in those states when they were at a certain point in their "cycle" as described above.  You could call it a time of imprint vulnerability.  A person very attached to heavy metal "music" may have gotten that way because they went through rough times and their environment was not secure and the music was favored by their "in group" and thus gave them comfort.  So, forever after, even if they may grow to like other music a bit, they will probably still be attached to their heavy metal for emotional reasons. So I think it doesn't mean they are dark and mechanical and whatever heavy metal evokes for other people, it may just mean a connection to something that felt good to them.

That's my new thinking on it anyway. 

Of course, it doesn't change the fact that some music originates in certain "artistic circles" that seek deliberately to evoke ugliness and discordance and that such music and art can affect a person's frequency resonance vibration and limit their receivership capacity to higher vibrations but I think we don't know exactly what that kind of "good music" might be.  The Cs have given a few hints here and there.  They didn't like "Creation Chant", a Native American drumming/chanting thing.  They liked Riverdance.  They like some Pink Floyd.  They mentioned melodic madrigal type music as being beneficial.  But not much beyond that. 

If Collingwood is onto something, music or art that makes you THINK rather than FEEL would be more objective.

I agree about the imprinting.  Perhaps it affects some more than others, like OPs. 
However, for a few friends and I, we ended up not caring for the music that we grew up with through adolescence. 

I suppose it depends on whether we move on from those emotions into music that connects to what we think about.  So many people like music today that they don't even understand, much like how abstract art became popular.

My chorus teacher in 8th grade told us how modern day music was not really music.  She said that music requires 4 things:
rhythm
melody   (this has declined, with the focus on rhythm/beats)
harmony  (I see this severely lacking in current music)
form

I forget what form meant and can't seem to find a solid definition, but perhaps this is what makes us think- the "plot" of the music which links emotion to thought?

I don't like the Creation Chant either because it misses some of those 4 key elements. 
“Nothing was your own except the few cubic centimetres inside your skull.” - George Orwell, 1984

"Just when I discovered the meaning of life, they changed it." -George Carlin

Caesar:
A: I was wrong to think I could change the masses by example. Humans are fickle and self-centered for the most part. Thus, if you wish to really effect changes, it can only be done by early education, and even then it is fragile and will not last. In the end you must be true to your own nature and fear nothing. If you do that you may make a difference after you are gone.

Online mkrnhr

  • SuperModerator
  • ********
  • Posts: 5,407
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #41 on: September 14, 2017, 06:04:15 AM »
I forget what form meant and can't seem to find a solid definition, but perhaps this is what makes us think- the "plot" of the music which links emotion to thought?

It's just speculation but what your teacher was maybe referring to is the structure of the music. For example, in some pieces of music there are small scale variations and large scale variations where a main theme (melody and harmony) evolves into another, or get enriched by more complex features, goes into some adventure, to finally come back to the first theme, with sometimes a difference, as if the music itself describes a journey. An obvious example of such a structure is the sonata form but it could be less formalized as well.
"the slipper must awaken"

Offline Laura

  • Administrator
  • ********
  • Posts: 32,418
    • http://www.laura-knight-jadczyk.com
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #42 on: September 14, 2017, 12:12:13 PM »
I forget what form meant and can't seem to find a solid definition, but perhaps this is what makes us think- the "plot" of the music which links emotion to thought?

It's just speculation but what your teacher was maybe referring to is the structure of the music. For example, in some pieces of music there are small scale variations and large scale variations where a main theme (melody and harmony) evolves into another, or get enriched by more complex features, goes into some adventure, to finally come back to the first theme, with sometimes a difference, as if the music itself describes a journey. An obvious example of such a structure is the sonata form but it could be less formalized as well.

The simplest of musical "forms" is that multi-stanzaed song with a repeating chorus. 
He who learns must suffer
And even in our sleep pain that cannot forget
Falls drop by drop upon the heart,
And in our own despair, against our will,
Comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.
Agamemnon, Aeschylus

Offline Cleo

  • Jedi Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 598
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #43 on: September 16, 2017, 12:16:31 AM »
Some years back, Ark heard about a famous Polish filmmaker, ‌Krzysztof Kieślowski, who made a set of famous Polish films called "The Decalogue".  So, he was enthusiastic about all of us sitting down and watching some famous Polish movies by famous Polish guy. He obtained copies...

We all agreed... and began to watch. 

I think that it was about the third or 4th of the 10 that NONE of us, not even Ark, could bear to watch another minute of those films. 

They weren't bad.  In fact, they were very good, intense and realistic in a way that sucked you in.  But the reality you were sucked into was so horrific that when it was over, you felt as though you had been put on the rack and tortured. 

One of the things that is implicit in artistic expression is dividing beautiful from ugly.  These films were everything that is ugly, piled to heaven.

And that is what this Sigur Ros video seems to be also.  And frankly, the ridiculous words at the end about love, and the appearance of a baby seem to me to be rather more like a programming maneuver than an honest part of the video.

Is there not a danger, when some of these artistic endeavors open the door, so to speak, to your emotions, that you are vulnerable, if not sufficiently aware, for negative ideas to enter in the opened door? 

Is this not a common theme lately, kind of like the case where our media bombards you with negative images, opens the door to your mind and emotions, then inserts their own ideas in?

What could be called postmodern art, movies, writings are much more subtle than that, but seem to work along the same principle.

Or am I off base here?

(It reminded me of what Laura was talking about in another thread about Reiki, where it was said, the crown chakra is opened for the attunement, but then must be closed, so that nothing untoward would enter afterward.)

Reminds me of what was discussed in this part of Session 9 April 2011:

Quote
A: We have more in mind. Take care with interacting with negative energies.

Q: (L) Well that’s kinda like creating your own reality, isn’t it?

A:  Not what we mean… Keep your guard up and do not allow negative energies to slip by… such as believing lies… listening to negative music while thinking it is positive…watching negative movies and thinking it is negligible. It is extremely important to not lie to the self. One can listen or watch many things as long as the truth of the orientation is known, acknowledged, and understood. Clear?

Q: (L) So, in other words: awareness. Calling a spade a spade and not allowing something negative to enter you and believing it is positive. You can see it, perceive it and acknowledge it but not allow it to influence you. Because obviously, you cannot shut off your perceptions of the world, but you can control how it affects you. So, don’t let it inside, thinking it’s something that it’s not.

(Belibaste) So, see it as it is. If it is negative, see it as negative.

(L) Yeah, and they’re saying to focus on truth in order for changes to manifest in you that are positive.  That is, “positive” can mean acknowledging that something is negative because it is truth.

Q: (Galatea) Choose the seeds you wish to water.

(L) Is that basically what we’re talking about here?

A: Yes

And, then from Session June 13th 2015:

Quote
Q: (L) Okay:
   
   
Quote
What is more important in determining a song’s value: the lyrics or the sound/mood/feeling?

A: The sound opens the door for the lyrics to enter for good or ill.

Q: (L) Does that mean that a song that sounds really horrible and mechanical and like somebody just beating on a pot or clanging on the hood of their car or something, and if that's the kind of music the person likes, but it also has good lyrics, then that's okay?

A: Not exactly. The sound can open gates at - or of - different levels and parts of the internal makeup.

Offline Azur

  • Dagobah Resident
  • *******
  • Posts: 906
  • Un peu plus haut, Un peu plus loin
Re: Sigur Ros video: what does it mean?
« Reply #44 on: September 16, 2017, 02:16:57 PM »
I forget what form meant and can't seem to find a solid definition, but perhaps this is what makes us think- the "plot" of the music which links emotion to thought?

It's just speculation but what your teacher was maybe referring to is the structure of the music. For example, in some pieces of music there are small scale variations and large scale variations where a main theme (melody and harmony) evolves into another, or get enriched by more complex features, goes into some adventure, to finally come back to the first theme, with sometimes a difference, as if the music itself describes a journey. An obvious example of such a structure is the sonata form but it could be less formalized as well.

The simplest of musical "forms" is that multi-stanzaed song with a repeating chorus.

A method used to transmit and remember important information, at some point.

« Last Edit: September 16, 2017, 02:30:14 PM by Azur »
"What concerns me is not the way things are, but rather the way people think things are"  -- Epictetus AD 55-c.135

Light your candle before Night, or it takes you -- Greek saying

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield. -- Tennyson

Children of tomorrow live in the tears that fall today. -- Butler

“We are going to do a terrible thing to you. We are going to deprive you of an enemy.” -- Georgi Arbatov