Lyrics, literature or pop poetry?

[TimTam]

Are the lyrics to songs part of their own form of literature, are they just poems put to music or are they just words put together to sounds good with no meaning to them?

Where do you stand on lyrics and whether they are literature or if lyricists are just wannabee poets.

[Rafael Domination]

Well, it also depends ont he artist. I've heard some songs that have a story to them, some are more abstract, and some are just nonesense.

[Shaun]

Like Raf said, it really really really depends. Almost all rap lyrics I would consider to be mindless, artless garbage. Any rap song with the word "Klondike" and "blonde dyke" as a rhyme should be expelled from the English language.
However, some music has really powerful lyrics that I would consider literature. There are some songs that are even hinting at other things, just as poetry would. A lot of Beatles songs are intentionally bizarre so that you have to look at them from a different perspective. What do you think Yellow Submarine is about? Or think of Lennon's "Imagine", which has had a lot of social impact for its very obvious lyrics that convey a powerful message.
So for me I can easily see as lyrics as literature, but it all really depends. Some rap does deal with powerful issues and doesn't just go around babbling about garbage like "smack dat ho, I iz coolz, bitch, what, fooz, I talk the smack, word". If you look at MCR's lyrics, which I'm sure a lot of you just hate, they are actually really important as literary forms because of the things they talk about. Green Day too. Doesn't matter if you find those groups detestable, they all talk about issues that are prevalent in society today.

So, yes, for the most part.

[Crocolyle]

I hate most rap music, but I wouldn't call it artless or mindless garbage. I mean, a lot of popular rock songs have no point or pathetic lyrics held together by forced rhymes. For example, I'm not a big fan of the Killers. Sometimes the artistic effect is achieved by more of the sound of language combined with the sound of the music, rather than by the meaning of the language.

To say that meaning is the most important aspect of art, that is a victory for the snobs and literati, when often the point of art, even rap music, is simply ars artis gratia. And a paycheck, but mostly the former. All art, regardless of how Shaun sees it is an expression of cultural ideas, and just because Shaun does not think highly of one culture it does not mean it isn't a culture and that they should not express themselves in their own unique, if offensive, poetic form.

Back on topic, there are two key differences between song lyrics and poetry. First, song lyrics are set to music, while poetry is often merely read or recited out loud (reading it silently ruins its effects) usually without music in the background. Secondly, poems, particularly modern ones, do not always incorporate rhythm and rhyme which often are essential to song lyrics. However, despite these two key differences, many poems can be put to music and instantly become song lyrics, and sometimes lyrics in songs do not follow a regular rhythm/rhyme pattern; therefore, it would be safe to assume that all song lyrics are a form of poetry. Just poetry with music.

If a song tells a story or is like a ballad or something, it still qualifies as poetry. Narrative poetry. A lot of poems do have a narrative element to it, and in fact some of our oldest poems, our epics are narrative poems: Beowulf, the Iliad, the Aeneid, the Odyssey, and more modern ones like the Song of Hiawatha, Paradise Lost, The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere.

I wouldn't say that lyricists are want to be poets; I would call them simply poets who use an audio medium instead of a literary one.

[jordanisonfire]

Well, as Lyle said, rap is, in my mind, an abbreviation of "Retards Attempting Poetry", but some of the lyrics are quite good. I don't listen to rap enough to name any, but I can name some that are bad. For example, Crank That by Soulja Boy. He basically says the same thing over and over again. And he can't sing. The only reason why people like him is because he's promoting sex, which gives teenagers the wrong idea, and people like the FX sounds.

And, as Lyle said, some rock is just shitty lyrics. He said the Killers, but I think all Indie bands are just stupid. Their singers can't sing, their musicians can't play music and they just suck, basically. I will accept what Shaun said about MCR having good lyrics, but the problem is Gerard Way sings them in a whiney voice that just makes me want to slap him across the face and get him to shut up. Go smoke another cigarette, Gerard, it might make your voice a little less high and whiney.

As for bands that are Nu-metal, they're pretty good, most of the time. Like Slipknot, they can have bad lyrics, but they can also have good. I don't usually listen to the lyrics too much, though, it's the amazing guitar playing and drumming that does it for me, as it probably is with most of their fans.

If you want great lyrics in a rock band, listen to Tool. Their lyrics are always deep and have an incredible amount of meaning, even if it takes a while to decipher at times. And that's the end of my "lecture". ^^

[Nyx]

You guys mostly said what I would've said. I'd like to point out again that not all rap music is mindless, mostly the popular ones are though.

[off topic but important]
Gerard Way's voice IS NOT whiney! ^^
[/off topic but important]

[jordanisonfire]

If he isn't whiney, then the moon is green.

[Shaun]

All art, regardless of how Shaun sees it is an expression of cultural ideas, and just because Shaun does not think highly of one culture it does not mean it isn't a culture and that they should not express themselves in their own unique, if offensive, poetic form.

Excuse me? I hate rap, but I never said it isn't a cultural expression. That would be a completely retarded statement. And has been said in other threads about rap, I like some of it. I like Tupac and Warren G and Will Smith and some of the old more 'hip hop' style folks, I just hate modern rap because it too all of the bad stuff about rap and amplified it.
I never said that because I don't think highly of rap culture that it isn't a culture. I also never said they shouldn't express themselves. I just don't like the form and think it is crap. That's all. I'm entitled to that opinion. You guys don't have to like country western music either, but you can't deny there is an entire culture built around it. I wouldn't listen to country western either by the way.
Most rap music is mindless, artless garbage, and no, not all music/lyrics has to have some clear meaning, but it should still have a meaning of some sort either in the words or in the music itself. Otherwise, what's the point? If you're not trying to say anything with it, then why are you doing it? You can get paid to make art.

[Nyx]

If he isn't whiney, then the moon is green.

And so the moon is today declared green ^^

[Crocolyle]

Excuse me? I hate rap, but I never said it isn't a cultural expression. That would be a completely retarded statement. And has been said in other threads about rap, I like some of it. I like Tupac and Warren G and Will Smith and some of the old more 'hip hop' style folks, I just hate modern rap because it too all of the bad stuff about rap and amplified it.
I never said that because I don't think highly of rap culture that it isn't a culture. I also never said they shouldn't express themselves. I just don't like the form and think it is crap. That's all. I'm entitled to that opinion. You guys don't have to like country western music either, but you can't deny there is an entire culture built around it. I wouldn't listen to country western either by the way.
Most rap music is mindless, artless garbage, and no, not all music/lyrics has to have some clear meaning, but it should still have a meaning of some sort either in the words or in the music itself. Otherwise, what's the point? If you're not trying to say anything with it, then why are you doing it? You can get paid to make art.

The point is, as I stated earlier ars artis gratia, art for the sake of art. You can say it's artless garbage until you're blue in the face, but that's your opinion and your opinion does not make it artless garbage. To people who like that style of music, it sounds good and is art. I mean you can turn your nose up at it, I'm not going to stop you.

Edit:
I actually like some Indie. I really like Say Anything, the Postal Service, and the Decemberists. I don't think the lead singer of the Decemberists is the best singer, but I like the lyrics or the songs, and they sound pretty cool.

[Shaun]

Some of it is art, some of it isn't, most of it is shameless garbage created only to make money and not to inspire or do anything of value. Soulja Boy comes to mind.
Now if we want to go for people that are rap artists that I may or may not like who do actually contribute to the genre form and I would still consider art (even though I really don't like them):
Kanye West, who usually creates some songs with powerful lyrics and only recently sold out to pointless dribble. Puff Daddy, B.I.G., Tupac, Warren G, Will Smith (though he sort of talks about silly subjects like "Parents Just Don't Understand", which appeals to the youth I suppose), Eminem, and god knows how many other people. They churned out songs with substance, value, and use, and got recognition for it, some more than others. They deserve that recognition for doing something worthwhile, even if you hate their music.
Soulja Boy, however, is getting recognition for writing songs about...what? Dancing and calling people hoes? That's not art. That's commercialized repeatable parrot rhythms from someone without talent. He's an insult to rap artists that actually ARE good and do cross over and appeal to people who may not like rap at all.
There is a limit to what is and isn't art. Say "smack dat ho up" 47 times in a row to a repetitive rap beat is not art. This is why we have an academia to determine these things...

[Crocolyle]

Some of it is art, some of it isn't, most of it is shameless garbage created only to make money and not to inspire or do anything of value. Soulja Boy comes to mind.
Now if we want to go for people that are rap artists that I may or may not like who do actually contribute to the genre form and I would still consider art (even though I really don't like them):
Kanye West, who usually creates some songs with powerful lyrics and only recently sold out to pointless dribble. Puff Daddy, B.I.G., Tupac, Warren G, Will Smith (though he sort of talks about silly subjects like "Parents Just Don't Understand", which appeals to the youth I suppose), Eminem, and god knows how many other people. They churned out songs with substance, value, and use, and got recognition for it, some more than others. They deserve that recognition for doing something worthwhile, even if you hate their music.
Soulja Boy, however, is getting recognition for writing songs about...what? Dancing and calling people hoes? That's not art. That's commercialized repeatable parrot rhythms from someone without talent. He's an insult to rap artists that actually ARE good and do cross over and appeal to people who may not like rap at all.
There is a limit to what is and isn't art. Say "smack dat ho up" 47 times in a row to a repetitive rap beat is not art. This is why we have an academia to determine these things...

Academia is always right. Science fiction isn't art. It's just derivative pulp crap meant to entertain (and by entertain, I mean lull and stupefy) the masses... or that's what Academia determines at least. Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, Stephen King novels--who cares if they're enjoyable, they aren't art. They're trash...

[Rafael Domination]

Excuse me? Care to clarify your thoughts on Sci-fi?

[Crocolyle]

(I was being sarcastic. Shaun said that academia does not consider Rap to be art, therefore it shouldn't be considered art. Academia says the same thing about science fiction.
There is a limit to what is and isn't art. Say "smack dat ho up" 47 times in a row to a repetitive rap beat is not art. This is why we have an academia to determine these things...
Shaun says academia determines what's art and what isn't. I don't think he was being sarcastic... The better question would be why Shaun suddenly considered scifi to be artless trash...)

[Shaun]

Actually the Academia doesn't consider rap to be artless, they would simply consider rap via artists like Soulja Boy to be artless.
As for SF, the Academia is slowly changing its mind. We are seeing science fiction, and fantasy, works in school curriculum. This is a lot to do with the perseverance of SF writers to continually write works that are influential, and the literary academia has never actually denied SF it's place, they just didn't want to give all SF it's place. 1984 and Brave New World have been on the canon for a lot time and there are actually degree programs in science fiction, not to mention a lot of academic interest in SF even in places where there aren't any SF programs. You can also argue with MA programs to get a special options to study SF (some people have done this).
The difference here is that the academia can change its mind on something that makes perfect artistic sense, but it won't likely change its mind on something like Soulja Boy who is probably 99% offensive garbage and 1% humorously idiotic.
Case in point: There are three universities in England that offer degrees either directly in Science Fiction or in speculative fiction as a whole. One of those universities I hope to attend.

[Rafael Domination]

(I was being sarcastic. Shaun said that academia does not consider Rap to be art, therefore it shouldn't be considered art. Academia says the same thing about science fiction.

Shaun says academia determines what's art and what isn't. I don't think he was being sarcastic... The better question would be why Shaun suddenly considered scifi to be artless trash...)

Oh :mellow:

I guess the lack of smileys made me take it that you were being serious. Eheheh...I thought for one second that someone else logged in as you. :D:blush:

[Crocolyle]

Actually the Academia doesn't consider rap to be artless, they would simply consider rap via artists like Soulja Boy to be artless.

Soulja Boy and other artists count as rap. Academia considers them artless. Therefore Academia considers rap artless. Not all rap, but some rap. I never meant all. You're really splitting hairs...


As for SF, the Academia is slowly changing its mind. We are seeing science fiction, and fantasy, works in school curriculum. This is a lot to do with the perseverance of SF writers to continually write works that are influential, and the literary academia has never actually denied SF it's place, they just didn't want to give all SF it's place. 1984 and Brave New World have been on the canon for a lot time and there are actually degree programs in science fiction, not to mention a lot of academic interest in SF even in places where there aren't any SF programs. You can also argue with MA programs to get a special options to study SF (some people have done this).

But they haven't changed its mind and the examples that you cite are more from the dystopia subgenre. Why technically they do count as science fiction, they make up a minute percentage of science fiction--what about all the stuff with robots, advance technology, and spaceships? You yourself have criticized literary Academia countless times on this board for what they consider art and what they consider pulp.

Science Fiction and Fantasy has always been in schools to a limited extent. I don't think there is any evidence in a trend of it becoming commonplace.

If it's changing the change is very slow.

The difference here is that the academia can change its mind on something that makes perfect artistic sense, but it won't likely change its mind on something like Soulja Boy who is probably 99% offensive garbage and 1% humorously idiotic.

That's your opinion. Some people may actually like it. Just because you don't doesn't mean that no one does. Maybe some people see some artistic virtue in it. Maybe they like the way it sounds.

You get all huffy when people bring up Eragon and that is probably the most boring, most derivative, and most poorly written book that I've ever read. That's 50% derivative garbage, 49% pathetic, and 1% humorously idiotic. And by humorous, I mean black comedy where you're only laughing because you're worried Big Brother is watching.


Case in point: There are three universities in England that offer degrees either directly in Science Fiction or in speculative fiction as a whole. One of those universities I hope to attend.

Three universities in one country and not ours. You do realize my university offers over 100 majors, one of which is puppeteering. You can get a degree in just about anything...

[Imelda]

Soulja Boy and other artists count as rap. Academia considers them artless. Therefore Academia considers rap artless. Not all rap, but some rap. I never meant all. You're really splitting hairs...


You just contradicted yourself twice there. I'd rephrase before Shaun comes along. :p

Three universities in one country and not ours.

I find that insulting. Our unis rule. For now.

You can get a degree in just about anything...

True, but only at what used to be termed 'polytechnics'. Universities like Liverpool (who offer a SF Masters ... I think. Is it a Masters, Shaun?) are well-established institutions, not some building that was slapped with the title 'university' because the PC brigade didn't want to hurt the feelings of those who weren't smart enough to get into universities and had to settle for polytechnics.

When places like Liverpool, and Oxbridge, and Newcastle, and Sheffield, and Nottingham start having courses like that they are being accepted by the academia.

Now I want a degree in puppeteering. :D

[Shaun]

Soulja Boy and other artists count as rap. Academia considers them artless. Therefore Academia considers rap artless. Not all rap, but some rap. I never meant all. You're really splitting hairs...

I think Meldi covered this one. Soulja Boy doesn't constitute all rap just as Stephen King doesn't constitute all horror writing.

But they haven't changed its mind and the examples that you cite are more from the dystopia subgenre. Why technically they do count as science fiction, they make up a minute percentage of science fiction--what about all the stuff with robots, advance technology, and spaceships? You yourself have criticized literary Academia countless times on this board for what they consider art and what they consider pulp.
Yes, I do criticize them because they do make contradictory statements from time to time, particularly on science fiction. But that is changing as some groups diverge and realize that works by authors like Asimov, Heinlein, Clarke, etc. are actually worth addressing from a literary/academic standpoint. Hence why SF is showing up in High Schools (Ender's Game, for example) and in Colleges/Universities. There is fantasy too. Watership Down is a fantasy novel that I was taught in High School, and I've taken courses where Tolkien was either read or used in conversation. Certainly you won't see SF or F show up as much as Shakespeare or Freud, but it is changing and that's good. The problem is it's not changing fast enough. Some people are still clinging to the old ideal that anything that doesn't reflect everything that is real in the world we live in today is not literature.

That's your opinion. Some people may actually like it. Just because you don't doesn't mean that no one does. Maybe some people see some artistic virtue in it. Maybe they like the way it sounds.

So, because people like something it should be considered appropriate? So for the sake of literature if people like a story that only says the C-word, it should automatically be considered art? What the public likes and what is considered art are completely different. I don't like a lot of rap, but I see its artistic value. Artistic value over mindless dribble. That's what we're talking about. Anyone can write a Soulja Boy song and act like a douchebag.


You get all huffy when people bring up Eragon and that is probably the most boring, most derivative, and most poorly written book that I've ever read. That's 50% derivative garbage, 49% pathetic, and 1% humorously idiotic. And by humorous, I mean black comedy where you're only laughing because you're worried Big Brother is watching.

I don't consider Eragon to be a novel of significant artistic value, though. That's the difference. I would never condone using it to teach, nor should it be included in any sort of canon, real or imagined. It is just a book that I found entertaining. I'd never teach it and nobody else should either, and Academia should only recognize it for its success in the book and the author, whose age is of importance when talking about that book.

Three universities in one country and not ours. You do realize my university offers over 100 majors, one of which is puppeteering. You can get a degree in just about anything...

Three MAJOR universities. Not secondary/fake Unis, but actual real colleges. There are also Unis in the U.S. U of K (or is it K State, one or the other) has a BA program and an extended program for teaching SF, plus several seminars held annually on the subject.
You can get a degree in most anything, but so what? If it has legitimate reason to exist, so be it. And just so you know, puppeteering is not an easy profession and the business for it is cutthroat, so even with a degree it's hard to get into and be successful. Puppeteering is extremely complex and extends beyond your typical Sesame Street stuff and moves on to mechanical puppets and the like, which are used in movies a lot. Don't diss them puppeteers :P

[Shaun]

On a side note, there are many universities that have extensive SF/F libraries and funds. UC Irvine has a huge library (the Eaton Collection) and they hold an annual conference meant for the academics out there. I hope to go this year, if possible. It's on Mars this year :D.

[Crocolyle]

I think Meldi covered this one. Soulja Boy doesn't constitute all rap just as Stephen King doesn't constitute all horror writing.
I meant some rap, not all of it. I never meant "all rap." Pretend the word "some" is inserted before it and that the "some" I'm talking about are the specific examples you brought up. I did not mean that Soulja Boy constitutes all rap. I didn't say that, but I see how you could have inferred that. I misspoke.

Yes, I do criticize them because they do make contradictory statements from time to time, particularly on science fiction. But that is changing as some groups diverge and realize that works by authors like Asimov, Heinlein, Clarke, etc. are actually worth addressing from a literary/academic standpoint. Hence why SF is showing up in High Schools (Ender's Game, for example) and in Colleges/Universities. There is fantasy too. Watership Down is a fantasy novel that I was taught in High School, and I've taken courses where Tolkien was either read or used in conversation. Certainly you won't see SF or F show up as much as Shakespeare or Freud, but it is changing and that's good. The problem is it's not changing fast enough. Some people are still clinging to the old ideal that anything that doesn't reflect everything that is real in the world we live in today is not literature.

Watership Down has been taught in schools ever since it has come out (my mother was taught it in high school). While it arguably does have fantasy elements, it really isn't exactly a fantasy novel.

The change has not happened yet, and while the trend may shift years from now, the current idea is that most science fiction and fantasy is artless drivvle. To bring this discussion back on point, without all this hairsplitting minutia (of which both of us have been doing), I only brought up science fiction to point out the hypocrisy of what you said earlier. You said "almost all rap lyrics" and later you said the majority of it is "shameless garbage." Then you said that this is why we have an academia--to determine what is art and isn't.

Except for the few great writers, the founders, and definers of the genre, most science fiction is seen by literary academia as garbage. Even though you argue that there is slow change, the change has not fully happened yet and academia still sees most science fiction as garbage.

Unless you want to confidently wallow in hypocrisy, you have to accept that if academia is right with music, they are also right with literature. This also further proves my point that art is subjective, and while you don't like most rap and consider most of it trash, it still can be considered art.



[/quote] Three MAJOR universities. Not secondary/fake Unis, but actual real colleges. There are also Unis in the U.S. U of K (or is it K State, one or the other) has a BA program and an extended program for teaching SF, plus several seminars held annually on the subject.
You can get a degree in most anything, but so what? If it has legitimate reason to exist, so be it. And just so you know, puppeteering is not an easy profession and the business for it is cutthroat, so even with a degree it's hard to get into and be successful. Puppeteering is extremely complex and extends beyond your typical Sesame Street stuff and moves on to mechanical puppets and the like, which are used in movies a lot. Don't diss them puppeteers :P[/QUOTE]

Major or minor it doesn't matter (by the way Imedla, I did not mean to offend you. I actually think British institutions are probably better than American ones). I don't think three universities overseas is adequate proof that literary academia has suddenly accepted science fiction as equal in artistic merit as so-called "literary fiction."

I didn't mean puppeteering wasn't a worthwhile profession, but so you know the reason my school has a puppeteering major is Jim Henson, who designed the typical Sesame Street stuff, was kicked out of our theater program so he asked if he could create the puppeteering major (we have a create your own major program). Our puppeteering major is actually directly related to Sesame Street and part of the reason we have it...

[Shaun]

I meant some rap, not all of it. I never meant "all rap." Pretend the word "some" is inserted before it and that the "some" I'm talking about are the specific examples you brought up. I did not mean that Soulja Boy constitutes all rap. I didn't say that, but I see how you could have inferred that. I misspoke.

Don't worry, I don't hold it against you. I misspeak too :P. We're human :P. I get what you mean though.

Watership Down has been taught in schools ever since it has come out (my mother was taught it in high school). While it arguably does have fantasy elements, it really isn't exactly a fantasy novel.

Didn't know that. It always seemed out of place when I learned it and I know a lot of people who never were taught it (the school I graduated from never even saw it in school curriculum). I still would consider it fantasy because it's talking bunnies, but I suppose you could argue it. I dunno, that's sort of a gray area I suppose.

The change has not happened yet, and while the trend may shift years from now, the current idea is that most science fiction and fantasy is artless drivvle. To bring this discussion back on point, without all this hairsplitting minutia (of which both of us have been doing), I only brought up science fiction to point out the hypocrisy of what you said earlier. You said "almost all rap lyrics" and later you said the majority of it is "shameless garbage." Then you said that this is why we have an academia--to determine what is art and isn't.

The change HAS happened. You can't possibly expect every single university to suddenly have a science fiction program. That's ridiculous. Especially in the U.S. where universities are finding themselves financially strained. My university is being hit hard right now because not only are they losing federal funding, but they are losing state funding too, which means fees go up, teachers are fired, etc. It's horrible.
But the change IS happening. There is a lot of academic support and many colleges do have classwork on SF, as I'm learning, but not degree programs. Some actually have degrees, some will let you petition for special treatment. Next year there are three courses in SF related topics in the literature department at my school, which is rather cool. UCSC is also the Uni that put together an online library of Heinlein's works, since he lived in SC for a good portion of his life. I already mentioned UCR, there are those three schools in England, U of K or K State, plus others. There are entire literary conferences on SF now, which when you compare it to 10 years ago is astonishing. The change hasn't happened all across the board, but it has happened and it is getting a lot of academic treatment, just not the same treatment as literary fiction, which is completely understandable...SF is smaller :P. They just don't give it the attention I feel it deserves and some still argue that SF isn't a real literary genre, but there are people who still argue over specific authors within literary fiction, about who should be read and not, etc. They even argue over the canon from time to time. The point is that things ARE changing, they just haven't changed enough yet, but it is clear that SF is being considered a significant genre by accredited Uni. I've changed some of my opinion on this due to research. For a lot of people it will look as though SF is just thrown into the garbage at Uni level, which for a lot of places is true...yes, there are still grumpy men out there screaming at the world that SF and F are stupid.

Except for the few great writers, the founders, and definers of the genre, most science fiction is seen by literary academia as garbage. Even though you argue that there is slow change, the change has not fully happened yet and academia still sees most science fiction as garbage.

I suppose that depends what you mean by garbage. If you mean that they consider any work that don't teach to be garbage, I think that is somewhat of a silly statement. There are a lot of great works that aren't taught which none of them would consider garbage, but perhaps don't think is for an academic setting. The same can be said of any genre, even of the classics or literary fiction. That being said, I think there has to be a line between garbage, not garbage, and genius. Genius is, in theory, supposed to be taught, not garbage is just stuff that is good, but not really of that genius level and not necessarily of great artistic merit, but certainly of interest for the casual person, and then garbage is basically stuff that should be burned (say, a book where the C word shows up every other word...)

Unless you want to confidently wallow in hypocrisy, you have to accept that if academia is right with music, they are also right with literature. This also further proves my point that art is subjective, and while you don't like most rap and consider most of it trash, it still can be considered art.

It'll be considered art by people that don't know what art is. Part of what makes art art is the intent behind it. A lot of rappers aren't rapping to do anything with their "ability", but just trying to make it rich and do whatever it is they do when they are rich. Some rappers actually try to send a good message (Kanye West...well, he tries to send what he thinks is a good message...doesn't necessarily work though...or Puff Daddy, or I'm sure lots of others I don't know of). Or people try to be original, which is worth noting. Almost all rap is garbage, but there is still a good chunk that is good, and then another good chunk that I hate, but I recognize for artistic value...since it does something of value. That's how art is generally determined. Does it say something? Does it show something? Does it give a powerful emotion founded in what it is saying? etc. The questions go on. Art might be subjective from the standpoint of the masses, but generally when it comes down to what will be recounted and written about 200 years in the future, it's not the masses that generally determine that, but people of some level of authority (academia for example). Will people be talking about Soulja Boy as an artistic genius in 200 years? Probably not; he'll fall off the face of the Earth most likely and never be heard of again. Most of the poppy wannabe punk bands will do the same. Will we remember MCR in 200 years? I doubt it. I like MCR's music, but I don't know if they will be remembered by future generations...they aren't on that same level is the greats that will go down in history forever. We'll likely never forget the Beatles...and if we do, that's a travesty...Hopefully I'm making sense. I fully get what you're saying, and yes, the academia still pushes things out that should be included. For them it's garbage, or at least not good enough to be considered of artistic/academic/literary/whatever value.

I didn't mean puppeteering wasn't a worthwhile profession, but so you know the reason my school has a puppeteering major is Jim Henson, who designed the typical Sesame Street stuff, was kicked out of our theater program so he asked if he could create the puppeteering major (we have a create your own major program). Our puppeteering major is actually directly related to Sesame Street and part of the reason we have it...

That's kinda cool :). I'm amazed the types of things they do with puppets these days...

[Crocolyle]

Jim Henson lives outside the Student Union:

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b370/gammaraypartyhat/Henson.jpg

[Imelda]

YOU HAVE A KERMIT STATUE?!

That is so unfair.

Although Sheffield did turn out Helen Sharman, the first woman in space. :D

[Shaun]

Yeah, but nobody cares about her :P. J/K. I've never heard of her, so I'll take Jim Henson, cause he's awesome and deserves a hug.

[Imelda]

... You're obsessed with space travel and you didn't know who the first woman in space was?

You should be ashamed.

Seriously.

[Crocolyle]

OFF TOPIC: Clearly my university has its priorities in order. We also have like a bajillion statues of Testudo (our school mascot is the MD state reptile, the diamond back terrapin). Particularly the bronze one in front of the library:

http://s23.photobucket.com/albums/b370/gammaraypartyhat/?action=view&current=Testudo.jpg

His nose is shiny, because students rub it for good luck. Students also leave offerings to it, from time to time.

I'm a fan of the Kertle in the student Union also:
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b370/gammaraypartyhat/Kertle.jpg

BACK ON TOPIC:
I'm not quite sure what I have left to say on this topic. It seems both of us have kind of settled in-between our original statements (either that or my morning coffee killed my contentious, argumentative nature... probably this actually... coffee makes me so carefree, calm, and agreeable. I hate myself after I drink coffee. If the coffee wasn't so good, I would vomit)... Art is subjective. Science Fiction, while accepted by most as a genre, is not taught because there isn't nearly as much sci-fi, and there kind of still is a bit of a glass ceiling set firmly in place by cantankerous academics who are unwilling to except the genre (though in a lot of what I have read, Scifi is still not very highly regarded. Maybe things written before a couple years ago are outdated).

I would say though that much of sci-fi and fantasy, as well as most speculative fiction, is based on the modern conventions of the genre, rather than the original mythology/folklore and the author's inventiveness. This problem is seen more so with fantasy and horror than with science fiction, but it is rare that a truly great work of speculative fiction emerges in today's date and time without leaving something to be desired.

In much the same way, modern Rap music, as well as Rock and other genres, is based more on the work of the respective genre that came before it, rather than the work from which the genre emerged. While some can argue that this phenomenon in both literature and music is "progress," many--not really me--think this creates a far too generic sound or formalized style with rigid preset conventions that only perpetuate derivation. Many of my audiophile friends refuse to listen to bands that emerged after 1980, claiming that they are based on the bands that are based on the origins of Rock, and are therefore the same sound rebottled.

Therefore, while there is a lot of Rap and Scifi, and while much of it is good, there honestly few contemporary works of greatness in either genre. Ursula K. LeGuin, Clarke, Heinlein, Herbert, Asmiov, and to a lesser extent OSC (I think his writing, while interesting and sometimes of merit is flawed in terms of characterization and believability, but I won't get into that), are truly great authors of the genre, but I can't think of too many names that are worthy [in my snobbish mind] to be taught and examined with a fine-toothed comb. Rap music is much the same. I would even go as far as to argue Eragon is almost the speculative fiction equivalent of Soulja Boy or whatever Rap example would be best here.

I apologize for these long-ass (by which I mean rambly), bombastic paragraphs. It really all should be one or two, but I figured it would tire your eyes so I created artificial breaks in it.

[Shaun]

Science Fiction, while accepted by most as a genre, is not taught because there isn't nearly as much sci-fi, and there kind of still is a bit of a glass ceiling set firmly in place by cantankerous academics who are unwilling to except the genre (though in a lot of what I have read, Scifi is still not very highly regarded. Maybe things written before a couple years ago are outdated).

The biggest problem with getting SF the attention it deserves is getting money back into the arts. Schools are being hit hard and the first places they cut in schools is from the arts, which is retarded considering that the arts comprises one of the largest industries in the world...look at Hollywood...that's the arts at work. It is being read and there are programs and classes for it, but it's a long haul to get it accepted everywhere. Unis are less likely to consider SF coursework if they can't even afford it.

I would say though that much of sci-fi and fantasy, as well as most speculative fiction, is based on the modern conventions of the genre, rather than the original mythology/folklore and the author's inventiveness. This problem is seen more so with fantasy and horror than with science fiction, but it is rare that a truly great work of speculative fiction emerges in today's date and time without leaving something to be desired.

I think fantasy delves more into mythology/folklore, although there have been, if memory serves me, some truly amazing SF works that used mythological themes as metaphors, etc. BUt I would generally agree here.

In much the same way, modern Rap music, as well as Rock and other genres, is based more on the work of the respective genre that came before it, rather than the work from which the genre emerged. While some can argue that this phenomenon in both literature and music is "progress," many--not really me--think this creates a far too generic sound or formalized style with rigid preset conventions that only perpetuate derivation. Many of my audiophile friends refuse to listen to bands that emerged after 1980, claiming that they are based on the bands that are based on the origins of Rock, and are therefore the same sound rebottled.

I kinda see their point. I agree, there isn't a lot of originality in rock anymore, or rap for that matter. This is the result of Wagner. Blame Wagner. He was the father of the two schools of thought on music: commercialization and anti-commercialization. In music this means that commercialization is stuff you can hum and remember...it has a definable tune and can be replayed on the radio or split into smaller parts and you'll still get it (i.e. the chorus). Anti-commercialization was Schoenberg...listen to Moses und Aron and you'll get what I mean.

Therefore, while there is a lot of Rap and Scifi, and while much of it is good, there honestly few contemporary works of greatness in either genre. Ursula K. LeGuin, Clarke, Heinlein, Herbert, Asmiov, and to a lesser extent OSC (I think his writing, while interesting and sometimes of merit is flawed in terms of characterization and believability, but I won't get into that), are truly great authors of the genre, but I can't think of too many names that are worthy [in my snobbish mind] to be taught and examined with a fine-toothed comb. Rap music is much the same. I would even go as far as to argue Eragon is almost the speculative fiction equivalent of Soulja Boy or whatever Rap example would be best here.

There are a lot more names than that :P. You're forgetting a whole lot of authors that aren't read as much today, but are still remembered for their brilliance. Harlan Ellison, Jules Verne, etc. Lots of names. There are huge new names too: John Scalzi, for example, or Robert J. Sawyer.
I think I would say you're mostly right on Eragon, except that I can read Eragon and not feel like killing myself (I find the book entertaining, but not great art), but Soulja Boy makes me wonder if our species even deserves to exist anymore if crap like that gains popularity.

[Crocolyle]

The biggest problem with getting SF the attention it deserves is getting money back into the arts. Schools are being hit hard and the first places they cut in schools is from the arts, which is retarded considering that the arts comprises one of the largest industries in the world...look at Hollywood...that's the arts at work. It is being read and there are programs and classes for it, but it's a long haul to get it accepted everywhere. Unis are less likely to consider SF coursework if they can't even afford it.

Having 12 years of a liberal Catholic education, I'm pretty ignorant on the subject of public schools and the arts being cut.



I think fantasy delves more into mythology/folklore, although there have been, if memory serves me, some truly amazing SF works that used mythological themes as metaphors, etc. BUt I would generally agree here.
Woops, that's more fantasy. Coffee also confuses me. Here's my clarification: I'd say the concepts of industrialization, scientific/technological advancement, spacefaring, sociology, and philosophy, as well as the idea of history as a pendulum. Like, instead of drawing on the concepts, too much of scifi draws too much from already written, relatively contemporary works.

There are a lot more names than that :P. You're forgetting a whole lot of authors that aren't read as much today, but are still remembered for their brilliance. Harlan Ellison, Jules Verne, etc. Lots of names. There are huge new names too: John Scalzi, for example, or Robert J. Sawyer.
I think I would say you're mostly right on Eragon, except that I can read Eragon and not feel like killing myself (I find the book entertaining, but not great art), but Soulja Boy makes me wonder if our species even deserves to exist anymore if crap like that gains popularity.

I wonder that myself sometimes... :D

[Shaun]

Having 12 years of a liberal Catholic education, I'm pretty ignorant on the subject of public schools and the arts being cut.

Well, it's pretty bad. Just as an example, at my Uni they aren't renewing a contract for a professor because they can't afford to keep him. Now, let me explain how the system works:
There are Lecturers (which basically is a professor who will teach courses and be paid to do so, but isn't a permanent person and has to be renewed each year...that's what the guy above is)
Then there are Professors (who have a contract, but it's not "tenure"0
Then there are Tenured Professors (which means you're here until you want to leave or you're fired cause you really really really suck, which is rare).
Now, this professor, being of the first, is not being renewed, but he's actually a terrific professor. He's wonderful and does things with Early literature (i.e. British writing from before 1700 all the way to the first English works in old English) that make it interesting and memorable. But we're cutting him because we can't afford to keep him.
This is happening all over. Not to mention that funding for the arts is horrible. At my school there is a constant battle just to be able to make xerox copies of things, yet the science departments are always well funded...their students get to play with laser guns and other strange items that they don't need, while the lit department is stuck scrounging and begging for scraps just so you can print out handouts for students to look at (we're talking like 3 page handouts...like a syllabus). Does that seem fair? No, it's not, especially since paying for paper and toner seems rather standard. This happens all over the place. My old High School actually cut money out of the arts (music, art art, and English) to give the Football team money to have free BBQs on the weekend that has nothing to do with the sport at all. It's not paying for transportation costs, yet the band has to earn ALL of its money just to get buses to concerts, competitions, etc. Mind you, the football team at my old school hasn't won a championship or made it to the playoffs in almost 30 years. They also got new uniforms while the band is begging just to get a couple new instruments.

Woops, that's more fantasy. Coffee also confuses me. Here's my clarification: I'd say the concepts of industrialization, scientific/technological advancement, spacefaring, sociology, and philosophy, as well as the idea of history as a pendulum. Like, instead of drawing on the concepts, too much of scifi draws too much from already written, relatively contemporary works.

Yeah, I would agree that a lot of CURRENT works are having issues dealing with anything really new. There's some new stuff, but not a whole lot.

[Imelda]

This is happening all over. Not to mention that funding for the arts is horrible. At my school there is a constant battle just to be able to make xerox copies of things, yet the science departments are always well funded...their students get to play with laser guns and other strange items that they don't need, while the lit department is stuck scrounging and begging for scraps just so you can print out handouts for students to look at (we're talking like 3 page handouts...like a syllabus).

To be fair, science degrees are generally of more tangible use to society. They're creating cheaper cars, more efficient energy, magical medicine, etc. While the Lit majors are writing books ... which you can do without a degree anyway. :p It's crazy to yell about photocopying paper, but you have to agree that it's fair the sciences get the bigger cut.

[Crocolyle]

Well, it's pretty bad. Just as an example, at my Uni they aren't renewing a contract for a professor because they can't afford to keep him. Now, let me explain how the system works:
There are Lecturers (which basically is a professor who will teach courses and be paid to do so, but isn't a permanent person and has to be renewed each year...that's what the guy above is)
Then there are Professors (who have a contract, but it's not "tenure"0
Then there are Tenured Professors (which means you're here until you want to leave or you're fired cause you really really really suck, which is rare).
Now, this professor, being of the first, is not being renewed, but he's actually a terrific professor. He's wonderful and does things with Early literature (i.e. British writing from before 1700 all the way to the first English works in old English) that make it interesting and memorable. But we're cutting him because we can't afford to keep him.
This is happening all over. Not to mention that funding for the arts is horrible. At my school there is a constant battle just to be able to make xerox copies of things, yet the science departments are always well funded...their students get to play with laser guns and other strange items that they don't need, while the lit department is stuck scrounging and begging for scraps just so you can print out handouts for students to look at (we're talking like 3 page handouts...like a syllabus). Does that seem fair? No, it's not, especially since paying for paper and toner seems rather standard. This happens all over the place. My old High School actually cut money out of the arts (music, art art, and English) to give the Football team money to have free BBQs on the weekend that has nothing to do with the sport at all. It's not paying for transportation costs, yet the band has to earn ALL of its money just to get buses to concerts, competitions, etc. Mind you, the football team at my old school hasn't won a championship or made it to the playoffs in almost 30 years. They also got new uniforms while the band is begging just to get a couple new instruments.

I thought you meant in elementary and secondary schools. I actually go to a public university, and while there are financial problems, I don't think they're that bad here... though this is the state flagship university...

[Shaun]

To be fair, science degrees are generally of more tangible use to society. They're creating cheaper cars, more efficient energy, magical medicine, etc. While the Lit majors are writing books ... which you can do without a degree anyway. :p It's crazy to yell about photocopying paper, but you have to agree that it's fair the sciences get the bigger cut.

No, I fully agree that they should get a big cut, but that's because I understand that it costs more to do science things and a lot less for literature. But if the lit. department is suffering while the science department is fooling around with stuff, that doesn't seem very fair. In all honesty, it wouldn't cost that much to keep the lit. department happy, and we're probably the cheapest department, yet we get hardly any money from the school. As you said, not fair that we have to beg for paper and toner, especially when the science department is running around shooting off lasers.

[Imelda]

But lasers are important, Shauny. :p

All the lit professors should go on strike. It works for the French.

[Shaun]

I agree, they are important...when they're being used to further scientific knowledge, but that's not necessarily what is happening. A lot of the times they are getting new "toys" to fiddle with and while I am a huge supporter of the sciences I do have a huge amount of love for the arts and feel that no art program should be begging for something as cheap as paper and toner, nor should they be begging for a little funding to have guest speakers (which some colleges should consider SF speakers for because people like Robert J. Sawyer actually give talks that appeal to both the literature and science crowds).
That's just where I stand. The arts is not, in general, an expensive program to run, so why we're begging for simplistic things is beyond me.