HNW question

[¾ dead]

A lot of things.

I think it should go without saying that scare quotes are implied any time I use the word "academia". People today, as surface-level and uneducated as we are, recognize that modern academia is a joke (on a much simpler level than that which you've expressed--Boy my head's spinnin' readin' all that!). And that is precisely why so many people try to eschew the idea of transcendental art or revolution. Because those ideas have been themselves reduced to pretentious dogshit by academics. Academics are the new aristocrats. We are not them. Revolution and transcendence are matters of personal responsibility at this point, not grooming. "But why bother expressing anything at all in your simplistic, muddled way, then?" Because expressing and publicizing one's hyper-individualized, post-community college epistemology is just a normal part of being a social creature (APE) and hoping to earn a bit of snack machine money in the process.

At any rate, I'd still assert that noise is now a well-enough recognized phenomena of popular culture, and has been since the early 90's at least, entirely outside of academic circles (From what I can see, noise only became de rigueur in academia again in the late-90's, not surprisingly after it appeared on MTV and started seeing releases on "popular alternative" labels [i.e., Relapse/Release]), and is therefore just as ultimately meaningless as anything else that lacks purpose without being given a hyper-individualized context. It's become an Internet meme.

But fair enough: Noise is not "pop". Still, it's passe. It's been through the wringer. It's just another idea scattered on the pile for us magpies to pick through. Find your niche. When it comes to art/philosophy FOR average, everyday people (I'm talking about people like myself: Everyday denizens of the Burgerpunk Dystopia, not the have-read-a-whole-book-ever-people, who've been more than indirectly-by-way-of-Wikipedia exposed to abstract philosophical concepts), we're all cultural magpies. We all have a lot of surface-level ideas and understandings of things, and not many particularly strong foundations. Everyone is disconnected. And so, we find a peasant-grade, cobbled-together, cult sense of culture, spirituality, meaning, etc. We're all just normal, uninspiring, frail, stupid over-smart animals stumbling through the Rubbishxe2x84xa2 here. It doesn't matter if it's Classical, white noise or M1 piano riffs. It's all there: a buffet of centuries-worth of art and culture and concepts and philosophical debris, all tangled up and waiting to be repurposed into a million little perfectly-individual, but ultimately hollow worldviews. That's the world us painfully pedestrian, lazy, apathetic, underprivileged Juggalo-people have inherited. That's really all that people require these days, for better or worse.

I'm content to make the best of it. But, for as much as I talk about being one of the unwashed masses, the truth is, while I'm not so intellectually distinct from them, I'm not well-integrated with them either. So, maybe "noise people" are fringe cases. Just like serial killer-cannibals and pedophiles and functional alcoholics and people who cut themselves and people who watch anime who can hide it well, we blend in. The interest in, enjoyment/intrigue, etc. of noise is not necessarily "mainstream", but for a maladjusted peasant, it is still little more than a pleasant distraction that seems about on par with any other vanilla perversion. So, why is that such an unsatisfactory answer? I guarantee, you'll be hard-pressed to find a better explanation for "enjoying noise" past the age/mentality of limp, angsty teenage rebellion. I'm curious if, maybe, you'd like one. But I really don't think you'll find it. Frankly, I feel like you're wasting your time on us. I feel like I've told you as much before, even.

[RUBBISH]

hivemind are cool.

I'm not as familiar with the recorded output but none of the hivemind shows I was at were HNW

Harsh drone...remember BRRs cottonball a 24 hour drone track...that was pre HNW ppopularity prevomir I think,when HNW was just drone. Then someone added distortion and some creepy themes and now we have HNW.

What are the dates for vomirs first release and or performance?

Was going through some old files and found a forgotten 24min track for a split that a nameless goof never released...from 5 or 6 years ago.
one of the track titles is
HARSH NOISE WHATEVER
I laughed.

[banned]

A lot of things.

I think it should go without saying that scare quotes are implied any time I use the word "academia". People today, as surface-level and uneducated as we are, recognize that modern academia is a joke (on a much simpler level than that which you've expressed--Boy my head's spinnin' readin' all that!). And that is precisely why so many people try to eschew the idea of transcendental art or revolution. Because those ideas have been themselves reduced to pretentious dogshit by academics. Academics are the new aristocrats. We are not them. Revolution and transcendence are matters of personal responsibility at this point, not grooming. "But why bother expressing anything at all in your simplistic, muddled way, then?" Because expressing and publicizing one's hyper-individualized, post-community college epistemology is just a normal part of being a social creature (APE) and hoping to earn a bit of snack machine money in the process.

At any rate, I'd still assert that noise is now a well-enough recognized phenomena of popular culture, and has been since the early 90's at least, entirely outside of academic circles (From what I can see, noise only became de rigueur in academia again in the late-90's, not surprisingly after it appeared on MTV and started seeing releases on "popular alternative" labels [i.e., Relapse/Release]), and is therefore just as ultimately meaningless as anything else that lacks purpose without being given a hyper-individualized context. It's become an Internet meme.

But fair enough: Noise is not "pop". Still, it's passe. It's been through the wringer. It's just another idea scattered on the pile for us magpies to pick through. Find your niche. When it comes to art/philosophy FOR average, everyday people (I'm talking about people like myself: Everyday denizens of the Burgerpunk Dystopia, not the have-read-a-whole-book-ever-people, who've been more than indirectly-by-way-of-Wikipedia exposed to abstract philosophical concepts), we're all cultural magpies. We all have a lot of surface-level ideas and understandings of things, and not many particularly strong foundations. Everyone is disconnected. And so, we find a peasant-grade, cobbled-together, cult sense of culture, spirituality, meaning, etc. We're all just normal, uninspiring, frail, stupid over-smart animals stumbling through the Rubbishxe2x84xa2 here. It doesn't matter if it's Classical, white noise or M1 piano riffs. It's all there: a buffet of centuries-worth of art and culture and concepts and philosophical debris, all tangled up and waiting to be repurposed into a million little perfectly-individual, but ultimately hollow worldviews. That's the world us painfully pedestrian, lazy, apathetic, underprivileged Juggalo-people have inherited. That's really all that people require these days, for better or worse.

I'm content to make the best of it. But, for as much as I talk about being one of the unwashed masses, the truth is, while I'm not so intellectually distinct from them, I'm not well-integrated with them either. So, maybe "noise people" are fringe cases. Just like serial killer-cannibals and pedophiles and functional alcoholics and people who cut themselves and people who watch anime who can hide it well, we blend in. The interest in, enjoyment/intrigue, etc. of noise is not necessarily "mainstream", but for a maladjusted peasant, it is still little more than a pleasant distraction that seems about on par with any other vanilla perversion. So, why is that such an unsatisfactory answer? I guarantee, you'll be hard-pressed to find a better explanation for "enjoying noise" past the age/mentality of limp, angsty teenage rebellion. I'm curious if, maybe, you'd like one. But I really don't think you'll find it. Frankly, I feel like you're wasting your time on us. I feel like I've told you as much before, even.

i think you're blurring a few things.

as consumers -- and often workers -- we are all the same; the difference exists in [and it may sound cliched] how we are to others, if not our work at being better consumers. that whole "bullsht detector" thing. academia is dumbed down at its edges, and modernist enterprises are less exciting than they were. these aren't the same thing, even if you want to link the explosion in the arts to increased working class action and so access to education.



it is not a coincidence that there are five numbers in a zip code.

[banned]

tl;dr
people are still making it new, that's not the issue. the issue is that the new isn't as fun [or as authoritative] anymore.

[banned]

i think a lot of contemporary interest in noise comes from people who want to go to that extreme in order to out-flank -- or even just authoritatively surf -- the trendiness that social media inspires. i guess i'm the same. the former. to an extent. but it got to be something that was interesting in its own right, by undercutting popular music, via industrial -- which interests me but less.

[JLIAT]

Feel free to be specific. In fact you seem to be reluctant to say if there could be something which is meaningless. You seem to say its impossible for a human to create something which is.

I'm not an absolutist, are you?

About certain things I'm absolutist.. But here you SEEM to be saying a person cant make something which is meaningless. And arguing i'm wrong to say they can. You cant decide it seems if something can be meaningless, so without such ability you seem to lack the discrimination to say i'm wrong. For you it seems you've also said, or shown, you think communication cant fail. Something which is meaningful cant become meaningless. There is sense, but never nonsense.

Anyway if you are not absolutist, are you absolute about that? How can you be sure?

The fact that the meaningless noise means a lot to the techie - doesn't make it meaningful, merely worrying about it wont make it go away.

Have you ever gotten the cold shoulder? Sometimes lack of communication is a message and means something.

Its a gesture, an act, like giving the finger. Silence can communicate if contrasted with non silence. And I thought you said communication couldn't fail.

Or trying to get the meaning on the Tanoy in a UK station.

I don't know what you are referring to but that doesn't make it meaningless.

Classic. It fails to signify. You said language was tricky, I think you need to try to be more precise, move from the ambiguous, else just go round in circles, maybe that's OK too, and you want this. I'm using 'meaning' in the sense of signified and signifier. Hence this can fail, the signifier doesn't communicate the signified, or the signifier has no signified, its meaningless. In the Vomir case the noise has no structure in which to signify, the purpose of making the noise is to not signify, and the description and context he gives makes this clear, the content of the noise is meaningless. The production of the noise is meaningful.

I can talk nonsense. You say - nope. I can deliberately talk nonsense to make a point etc, or do so by virtue of incompetence.

Or Vomir's - of course I know its changing voltages, only they are so random as to prevent difference in which meaning can be encoded. Not that he is trying to do this anyway!

Can you really be sure you know what he is trying to do? How do you know it's all not a big prank?

I cant, here in the world I cant be absolute.

Also maybe you need a larger sample size.. maybe over long enough period there is a pattern.. human perception of those changes is really not capable of detecting what exactly is going on.

He limits his work to 20 minutes, says its meaningless noise, i'm prepared to accept this.

Maybe you have Vulcan hearing?

I don't think so, Vulcan's are fictitious, they have no ears, cant hear. Maybe Jesus is deliberately confusing me, or you, obfuscating is the word?

As to not having to be binary, what I said was "You cant have a signal which can carry information without a minimum of two states"

Yup and obviously noise has at least two so your argument is on the wrong foot.

So what is vomir referring to when he says no change.. no composed change.. tone.. once it starts no change..

In your world maybe. So there cannot be a random signal, or does this communicate randomess, then I think you might say its then not random, you know the random number.

unless of course it stops then there are two states on and off.. so binary.. communication achieved!

Sure - a communication protocol has bee achieved, but no communication. The two states are the noise, in which no communication can occur, and silence (or another distinguishable state, likewise.

Like smoke signals.

Here is I think your lack of absoluteness.

In smoke signals, the arbitrary smoke and no smoke can be used to send a message which has meaning. Communication.

The smoke is arbitrary, but NO! you say, it has a meaning, it means fire, it means, someone lit a fire, wants to communicate.

Such that the big bang means the universe stated 13.5 billion years ago.

Vomirs work means he want to express his ideas or lack thereof.

Without clarification I think you end up in a "meaningful" world. But what then is the meaning, what is it communicating.

A real dog does not communicate its a dog, its a dog. DOG communicates, the random letters attach to a thing. That doesn't occur in noise. It's the definition, one of, of noise.

[JLIAT]

A lot of things.

And more things in reply...


So, why is that such an unsatisfactory answer? I guarantee, you'll be hard-pressed to find a better explanation for "enjoying noise" past the age/mentality of limp, angsty teenage rebellion. I'm curious if, maybe, you'd like one. But I really don't think you'll find it. Frankly, I feel like you're wasting your time on us. I feel like I've told you as much before, even.

Aside from the very minor point, quite a few noise people are influenced by the likes of Richard Long, and other artists who they came across at University, Hell i'm not saying Uni, that was 40 or so years ago. Let that go.

I think your reply is eminently satisfactory.

As for why people like, more - enjoy noise, actually i'm not that much interested. I'm no sociologist. Likewise i'm vaguely interested in why people seem to enjoy visiting art galleries, which in my youth were quite empty, but my presumptions are fairly negative. In the UK they are free, and its a cool, Hipster thing to do.

I'm more interested in the activity itself, noise and its consequences for music / art. Well I should say 'was'. Any 'challenging' of convention is long gone. Though many see themselves as doing so? IDK, Identity is a big thing these days. I note your use of "US".

The myths of "US" and "Them" prevail. Maybe a helpful survival tool.

[JLIAT]

Pardon me while I ramble on about might and Nietzsche.

Likewise if I retort, I do like 'retort' xe2x80x93 pulp fiction!

Nietzsche is making excuses for his own damaged self.
Ironically Nietzsche was a hypocritical sickly asocial creepy weakling...not at all uber.

I'm not sure why that nullifies his overcoming of Nihilism, which obviously he failed to do!

Yes he has some good one liners but I'm not investing in the guy...that's why the joke book Might Makes Right says in its introduction..and I paraphrase...if you are an ubermensch this book is not for you this book is for the weak or those lacking...something along those lines.
And yet the people that hype that book and Nietzsche overlook that introduction...I read that and stopped reading. I'm not gonna get took by a 100 year old joke. Maybe id read it if I found a copy at the thrift store but I have about 50 or more books in front of it that more important.

Again 'Might makes right' doesn't ring as Nietzschean to me. Having just wikied it, no I don't think its Nietzsche at all. If you want Nietzsche in a nut shell try his own Ecce Homo (note the danger of recommending books) xe2x80x9cThe book contains several chapters with self-laudatory titles, such as "Why I Am So Wise", "Why I Am So Clever", "Why I Write Such Good Books" and "Why I Am a Destiny". xe2x80xa6 and of his Zarathustra he says xe2x80x9cA book for All and Nonexe2x80x9d He happened to dislike Germans, and thought the Jews were best fit to goven Europe, but these are all secondary.

I also do not care for negative prognosticators and prevaricators that don't offer real solutions or if they do they expect other people to do all the work.
Its self important Bullshit that maybe with proper composting could be good for something or like some of Nietzsche ideas are worse than good for nothing and cause problems and confusion.
And the irony of anti religion becoming a religion with its own mythology and godlings(give it a 1000 years)

All maybe true, but if I may give my take on Nietzsche's task. There are (my reading) two approaches to life:

1. Keep your head down, look for the easy money, don't take risks, and hope for a pleasant life and pleasant death. (This is The Last Men (always I think of Tony Blair)) and its what the herd wants.

2. Look for the most terrible, difficult and hardest task, or problem. Try to overcome it. Attempt at overcoming, if success xe2x80x93 you are the overman.

Dont despise those who choose 1, if you choose 2, its a waste of energy. People who choose 1, will despise those who choose 2, for it might mean they are wrong, and dam they might succeed.

This is where Luke thinks i've chosen 2. I haven't, I see the importance of Nietzsche, but i'm no Nietzschean.

Athiesm that cites science or lack of ones own mystical experience with lets call it... the divine(insert term that works for you)...as proof of Nothing or of the divine not existing is simple minded and just wrong. Black swan fallacy.

Maybe. The above I find hard to follow. Like Nietzsche I dont believe in science, spirit or mysticism. He believes in 'the earth' if he believes anything, rather he is that. And that I find attractive.

Writing a book is not a solution to any problem except not having something to read

In the real or natural or scientific sense might as Nietzsche and ragnar redbeard present does not make right.

Don't conflate the two. For Nietzsche right and wrong, good and evil, truth and reason are all to be overcome, or die, go mad trying. And you might be right re books, but Zarathustra was a myth, and myths are deep. Deep as in the soil, and springs which well up at the roots of mountains.

The rest of your writing re xe2x80x9cmightxe2x80x9d, I don't find in Nietzsche...

Anyhow...what makes a noise wall harsh?
Is HNW just drone with distortion.

Yes.

[¾ dead]

A lot of things.

And more things in reply...


So, why is that such an unsatisfactory answer? I guarantee, you'll be hard-pressed to find a better explanation for "enjoying noise" past the age/mentality of limp, angsty teenage rebellion. I'm curious if, maybe, you'd like one. But I really don't think you'll find it. Frankly, I feel like you're wasting your time on us. I feel like I've told you as much before, even.

Aside from the very minor point, quite a few noise people are influenced by the likes of Richard Long, and other artists who they came across at University, Hell i'm not saying Uni, that was 40 or so years ago. Let that go.

I think your reply is eminently satisfactory.

As for why people like, more - enjoy noise, actually i'm not that much interested. I'm no sociologist. Likewise i'm vaguely interested in why people seem to enjoy visiting art galleries, which in my youth were quite empty, but my presumptions are fairly negative. In the UK they are free, and its a cool, Hipster thing to do.

I'm more interested in the activity itself, noise and its consequences for music / art. Well I should say 'was'. Any 'challenging' of convention is long gone. Though many see themselves as doing so? IDK, Identity is a big thing these days. I note your use of "US".

The myths of "US" and "Them" prevail. Maybe a helpful survival tool.

I've never heard of Richard Long.

As for consequences, they've already been executed. People find their niches. Some excel at making beautiful music and keeping grand traditions alive, though it often boils down to a more dignified/devoted form of pretentious "hipsterism" and steampunk wankery in the end. Fine and good, for what it is (hasn't it been that way throughout the ages?). At least they're elevating things a little, which is nice. The hairstyles may have changed. Maybe in the future, conductor's wands will have little laser pointers built into them. But it's essentially the same. Classical forms have not and are not going anywhere. They're just older now. They're the old ladies that lived in this quiet, gentile suburban neighborhood before it turned into a crowded, noisy, dirty, confusing, ghettoized shithole. You hardly see them because they only go out on Sundays. They're out of touch (understandably) with their surroundings. I think we both recognize that's the consequence of Socialism, for better or for worse (I'm not making any arguments for or against, it's merely an observation. People can make of it what they like because I'm not interested in that).

...actually i'm not that much interested. I'm no sociologist.

The myths of "US" and "Them" prevail. Maybe a helpful survival tool.

These two lines of thinking don't gel. At any rate, yes. It's a pretty easy conclusion to reach from an uncomplicated, naturalistic point of view (lions vs. antelopes). Naturalistic cognition hasn't left us, society has simply altered the landscape and twisted the methodology of nature as we understand it via the convenient "us and them" analogy of wilderness versus civilization. There's certainly a palpable "me and them" dichotomy between you and the rest of us here, which is what I'm always reflecting back when I do try to talk with you. My understanding of it is that there's always going to be people with resources (including intellect, experience, etc.) who abuse them for both extreme and extremely petty reasons. Things are not meant to be universally understood, particularly when we don't even speak the same language, and are unwilling to learn a new language. At any rate, I'm not someone who'd assert that meaning is universal, but that universality is in fact an absurd construct itself that isn't worth pondering, like gender. Or time. Or equality. (full disclosure: I don't see gender as a construct) That is part of the wackiness and fun of being self-aware, and aware of others, including others we hurt. Again, I don't understand what you're getting out of this.

[¾ dead]

tl;dr
people are still making it new, that's not the issue. the issue is that the new isn't as fun [or as authoritative] anymore.

And that's just a side-effect of overpopulation, both literally and figuratively, in my mind. This is why people strive for "individualism". There's no alternative but to create your own private eggshell universe and the rules to go with it.