Sigur Ros & Attenborough Vs Bliss n Eso & JBT
Sigur Ros and Attenborough (via the BBC) win hands down. It's not all Bliss n Eso's (with John Butler's help) fault though, they were up against it from the outset.
Visually - Even putting aside for one moment the music behind these film-clips (the quality of which is admittedly subjective), in the argument for preserving our planet, having the most expensive documentary ever filmed (in the BBC's Planet Earth) on your side is going to go a long way when it's in competition with file footage that had been spliced together. It's not just the quality of the film itself though, but what it's depicting. Attenborough shows the wonders of nature, without a human in sight. Unspolit landscapes abound, and the fierceness of both the natural and animal world is on display. It is so well captured and the absence of humans only reinforces how small we really are, and how well the Earth copes without our influence.
In contrast, the Bliss n Eso clip shows all the worst traits of humanity and reinforces how destructive people can be. I get that it's confronting, and is making a point, but in trying to convince people to save the planet, the clip only made me think the planet would be better off without any humans. Not least Bliss n Eso.
Musically - It's not that I even disagree with Bliss n Eso and John Butler. They're on the right side, and they're arguing for the right things. It's just that it's so poorly done, that they do their message a disservice. Middle class white musicians from the inner city are never going to convince those that are happy to see the environment destroyed to change their mind. They're preaching to the converted (and even then, turning a lot of them off). Again, it's not even the message itself, but rather the delivery. It is so obvious. The lyrics are about as trite and simplistic as lyrics get. If someone had to write a stereotypical Aussie hip hop song regarding protecting the environment and being cool to each other, they would come up with something very similar to that Bliss n Eso (and John Butler) song. Having said that, I don't really know anything about Bliss n Eso, so I may be being unfair. Still, it's right up John Butler's alley, so the same argument applies to him.
Jonsi from Sigur Ros on the other hand, sings in Icelandic, and occasionally Hopelandic (a combination of Icelandic and a made up language he uses to sing in). If nothing else, this prevents any cringe worthy lyrics ruining what might otherwise be a positive or moving experience. At least, it does for people that don't speak Icelandic.
I suppose I am being a bit harsh.
Sunday, 28 April 2013
Nature and Collective Poem
We called the Eastern side the Oceanside and it was there that we watched sharks
From Indian Head to sand bars below
we watched with purposeless intent, too and fro
And so they came, dragging in the evening, long eyes stitched to going forward
then disappeared again, dragging our eyes beneath the waves, as if in dream.
From Indian Head to sand bars below
we watched with purposeless intent, too and fro
And so they came, dragging in the evening, long eyes stitched to going forward
then disappeared again, dragging our eyes beneath the waves, as if in dream.
Friday, 19 April 2013
Hyperspace, we're going into hyperdrive.
Reflecting on this weeks (excellent) presentation, and Heidi Campbell's chapter regarding the Abrahamic faiths and their engagement with new media, the sentiments that resonated most strongly with me, in that they seemed to encapsulate the core of what I'd intuitively felt, came from Campbell's elucidation on the Islamic approach to Religion On-Line.
As was discussed in Wednesday's seminar, one of the potential problems with people searching for their spiritual nourishment on line is that they miss out on the physical, collective experience of being around other worshippers, while at the same time contributing to the dwindling participation rates in neighbourhood congregations.
However, this autonomous worship can also lead to a false knowledge of religious texts, and raises the question, 'Is everyone's own interpretation of a religious text equally valid?'
Campbell cites the warning on the homepage of the University of Southern California's Muslim Student Association's Qur'an Database webpage.
"Today, technology is helping bring Islam into the homes of millions of people, Muslim and otherwise. There is a blessing in all this of course, but there is a real danger that Muslim's will fall under the impression that owning a book or having a database is equivalent to being a scholar of Islam.This is a great fallacy. Therefore, we would like to warn you that this database is merely a tool, and not a substitute for learning, much less scholarship in Islam (Campbell 2010: 32)."
Given the enormity and freedom of the Internet, any and all theories and interpretations may be suggested and discussed. This is not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself, but it seems to me that even among secular groups people tend to like listening to and discussing things with people that agree with them. Amongst certain religious groups however, this potential echo chamber can lead to such misinterpretation of religious texts that the benefits of the space and freedom of on line religious learning are seriously undermined. This though, obviously is not restricted to religious groups, with any number of anti social groups exploiting the same space.
As an Iranian cleric is quoted as saying,
"The internet is like a knife. You can use it to peel fruits, or to kill someone. But that does not mean that the knife is bad (Campbell 2010: 33)."
As was discussed in Wednesday's seminar, one of the potential problems with people searching for their spiritual nourishment on line is that they miss out on the physical, collective experience of being around other worshippers, while at the same time contributing to the dwindling participation rates in neighbourhood congregations.
However, this autonomous worship can also lead to a false knowledge of religious texts, and raises the question, 'Is everyone's own interpretation of a religious text equally valid?'
Campbell cites the warning on the homepage of the University of Southern California's Muslim Student Association's Qur'an Database webpage.
"Today, technology is helping bring Islam into the homes of millions of people, Muslim and otherwise. There is a blessing in all this of course, but there is a real danger that Muslim's will fall under the impression that owning a book or having a database is equivalent to being a scholar of Islam.This is a great fallacy. Therefore, we would like to warn you that this database is merely a tool, and not a substitute for learning, much less scholarship in Islam (Campbell 2010: 32)."
Given the enormity and freedom of the Internet, any and all theories and interpretations may be suggested and discussed. This is not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself, but it seems to me that even among secular groups people tend to like listening to and discussing things with people that agree with them. Amongst certain religious groups however, this potential echo chamber can lead to such misinterpretation of religious texts that the benefits of the space and freedom of on line religious learning are seriously undermined. This though, obviously is not restricted to religious groups, with any number of anti social groups exploiting the same space.
As an Iranian cleric is quoted as saying,
"The internet is like a knife. You can use it to peel fruits, or to kill someone. But that does not mean that the knife is bad (Campbell 2010: 33)."
References
Campbell, H. When Religion Meets New Media. Taylor and Francis, 2010.
Tuesday, 9 April 2013
Just sayin'.
At least our spiritual lives aren't vulnerable to the market yet. And football clubs do a great deal of good community work. I'm yet to be convinced Nova offers anything though.
Controlling Your Message / Know Your Product
A reflection on Mara Einstein's The Evolution of Religious Branding.
Branding. The marketing people, along with their co-conspirators, the PR people, have taken over and infiltrated just about every facet of society. Certainly every facet of society that brushes up against the media. National folk heroes - our sporting organisations - and folk devils - politicians - are pre-occupied with their image, with teams of advisers seemingly perched on both shoulders whispering in their ears the importance of staying on message. Staying on message, another awful term introduced by these whisperers. To stay on message is to protect the personal brand, the brand of their employee/party and of course, to validate the employment of said whisperer. Like player agents, they've created roles for themselves and convinced those using them that they're indispensable.
Meanwhile commercial media waits, ready to pounce. "In the public interest!" they cry as they expose and humiliate some poor fool caught unaware. Perhaps it is, perhaps it's not. However, these commercial media outlets have their own fallible stable of 'stars' and their own teams of marketers and PR people, to massage any indiscretion to cause the least amount of damage to their brand. It's a game, and a fairly ugly one at that.
And now, with a sense of if you can't beat them... the church, in the face of dwindling attendances and an ageing congregation has too bought into this game. The youth demographic, whether Gen Y or younger, have been raised in this media driven era, where both information and the individual exists as a commodity, so it makes sense for the church, in trying to reach a younger audience, to do so through channels most likely to reach and resonate.
From the privatisation and corporation style structure of the Hillsong Megachurch, to Scientology running a sophisticated on-line awareness campaign, the determined push of marketing and branding into religion has had initial success. But what kind of success? And at what cost?
By targeting such a young demographic, the hope is that the individual will identify with a particular religious brand, and 'spend' both their actual (by way of donations, purchasing merchandise) as well as their spiritual (being an ambassador, getting involved in the community) wealth there. It will be hoped that families become engaged and new generations of worshippers continue to become involved.
In that sense, it has the makings of a long term plan. But it still seems to be a long term plan that hinges in no small part on the continued engagement with youth culture, and youth cultural trends change significantly over the course of if not a few years, then certainly by the decade. People move on.
That's not to suggest that church going is like 80's outfits, or grunge music. But if it begins to be marketed in the same way that more seasonal products and styles are, or governed in the same way that football clubs and FM radio stations are managed, then it risks being devalued to the same level.
Perhaps it goes hand in hand with corporate governance and transparency. Or return on investment. But as much as I love my football team, and some people must love the breakfast crew on Nova, it's a shame that our spiritual lives, too, are exposed to the market.
Branding. The marketing people, along with their co-conspirators, the PR people, have taken over and infiltrated just about every facet of society. Certainly every facet of society that brushes up against the media. National folk heroes - our sporting organisations - and folk devils - politicians - are pre-occupied with their image, with teams of advisers seemingly perched on both shoulders whispering in their ears the importance of staying on message. Staying on message, another awful term introduced by these whisperers. To stay on message is to protect the personal brand, the brand of their employee/party and of course, to validate the employment of said whisperer. Like player agents, they've created roles for themselves and convinced those using them that they're indispensable.
Meanwhile commercial media waits, ready to pounce. "In the public interest!" they cry as they expose and humiliate some poor fool caught unaware. Perhaps it is, perhaps it's not. However, these commercial media outlets have their own fallible stable of 'stars' and their own teams of marketers and PR people, to massage any indiscretion to cause the least amount of damage to their brand. It's a game, and a fairly ugly one at that.
And now, with a sense of if you can't beat them... the church, in the face of dwindling attendances and an ageing congregation has too bought into this game. The youth demographic, whether Gen Y or younger, have been raised in this media driven era, where both information and the individual exists as a commodity, so it makes sense for the church, in trying to reach a younger audience, to do so through channels most likely to reach and resonate.
From the privatisation and corporation style structure of the Hillsong Megachurch, to Scientology running a sophisticated on-line awareness campaign, the determined push of marketing and branding into religion has had initial success. But what kind of success? And at what cost?
By targeting such a young demographic, the hope is that the individual will identify with a particular religious brand, and 'spend' both their actual (by way of donations, purchasing merchandise) as well as their spiritual (being an ambassador, getting involved in the community) wealth there. It will be hoped that families become engaged and new generations of worshippers continue to become involved.
In that sense, it has the makings of a long term plan. But it still seems to be a long term plan that hinges in no small part on the continued engagement with youth culture, and youth cultural trends change significantly over the course of if not a few years, then certainly by the decade. People move on.
That's not to suggest that church going is like 80's outfits, or grunge music. But if it begins to be marketed in the same way that more seasonal products and styles are, or governed in the same way that football clubs and FM radio stations are managed, then it risks being devalued to the same level.
Perhaps it goes hand in hand with corporate governance and transparency. Or return on investment. But as much as I love my football team, and some people must love the breakfast crew on Nova, it's a shame that our spiritual lives, too, are exposed to the market.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)