Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rick Julian who wrote (31315)	2/20/1999 5:54:00 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Perhaps, later in his life, once his creative flame has begun to dim some, and the call of his muse becomes less seductive, he can become less selfish with his energies Do you really think that the creative drive pales with age? I rather hope it doesn't. I've been writing all my life, a craftsman with ill-defined illusions about becoming an artist someday. It certainly won't be anytime soon: it will be about 15 years before the assorted people who depend - almost exclusively - on my nurturing can be left to their own devices. In the meantime I write for money, and trust that the process of nurturing will provide a level of understanding that will ultimately improve the work that emerges 15 years from now, assuming that it does. By that time I may prefer to kick back on a beach somewhere and spend my time looking at fish and coral. BTW, I don't even know how to tie a tie, and am not eager to learn. Thank God for cyberspace; nobody gives a damn how you dress.

To: Rick Julian who wrote (31315)	2/20/1999 10:50:00 PM
From: nihil	Respond to of 108807

I agree with everything you said -- and that's very rare for me and for this thread. I hoped I made it clear that "being homosexual or bi-- did not mean that one engaged in active homosexual activities. A heretosexual who never got laid would still be homosexual. I guess I meant that the love for persons of one's own sex as well as love for persons of the other sex I thoght was useful to make the emotional link to others. Of course there are men who couldn't stand the conscious thought of having sex with another man who can paint fine portraits and make fine statues. I don't deny even greatness. It is I think the emotion rather than the act that makes artistic union with the object possible. When Rembrandt painted a withered old man, I sense (I may be nuts of course) that his emotion toward the man is one of love. Its easy enough for almost anyone to have this emotion to a baby of either sex. I think its programmed in, and probably in most of us a kapu against sexual expression with a child. With older subjects, the passion may grow and the kapu decrease until the kapu element is eliminated altogether. That's what I see in Michelangelo and David. Some men, I believe, admit the beauty but cannot admit even to themselves the emotion of love toward the human ideal of the object. There are some objects so beautiful and so sexualized, as to make many viewers acutely uncomfortable, like pornography ("The Kiss"). Imagine if some director could make a sex film with the artistic integrity of the closing scenes or the nude scenes of Gwyneth Paltrow, of Shakespear in Love , or the love scenes of Bogart and Bergman in Casablanca, or the pathos of the love scenes in Seven Samurai, or even Gable carrying Vivien up the stairs in GWTW. Why does taking off the clothes and having sex make films so bad. But imagine how terrifying it would be to have truly great sex films. I would watch little else, myself, I who never look at a pornographic film for esthetic reasons alone. Maybe I was a little overboard about the deficiencies of "purely heterosexual men" but in he sense that loving men (not having sex with men is an essential trait) I believe that in the great bamboozlers, preachers, crowd pleasers, entertainers there is a strong, almost palpable love emitted by them all. If one sees a preacher exciting all the women in the crowd and leaving most men untouched you have my example. The great preacher grabs them all. That is what I see in the great sermons of St. Paul and Jesus. There was no denial of universal love and no distinction drawn between eros and agape. I know the music deal quite well. One could be a civilized human being or one could be a fine musician. Bach was probably certifiably insane. He worked incredibly hard. He had a magic mind that cold write orchestrated harmony and counter point as fast as pen could hit paper. And he taught his children and wives music on the fly. I daresay he was very quick in bed, too. Just an extraordinarily productive man. I'm pretty sure he didn't take out the garbage or take his wife to dine at the Sizzler on Friday night. Remember how the Beetles reacted to John and Paul getting married. To each other, it might have worked. According to reports, Horowitz was a complete nut except at the piano. Lenny was a hyperactive homosexuals and was both a composer and a great conductor. Some how, I can't see him driving the kids to baseball practice. For many occupations, especially scientific and artistic, the worker must be at the command of his art, but can take some time off in between. Family must respond to these demands or prevent achievement in the worker. I knew a great concert pianist who won a Pulitzer for one his many books on music, and was a professor of French at the University of Chicago. It is inconceivable to me that he could have had a "normal" family life and achieved more than one third of this. The funny part was that in college he was considered a brilliant mathematician and various important people almost faught to have him study with them. We know athletes to be world class have to concentrate, and musicians. I think brilliant people should be allowed to concentrate quite young to discover if they are world class. If it doesn't work out, they can be given a quick refresher with Cliff's notes and turned lose on MBA schools. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.