Comments on: Climbing Mount Everest

By: Ambigulous

Ambigulous — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 11:34:59 +0000

Anita @ [29]

Hear, hear!!

Well said. When BJ was Minister for Science, an awfully big supernova went off bang!! in a nearby galaxy - one of our little companion galaxies - in 1987 I think it was. I had the pleasure of hearing Minister Jones in Parl’t explaining to the empty benches, that according to Einstein’s theory, the supernova “hadn’t yet exploded”.

PIFFLE!! Where the fek did he think the bloody light the astronomers were observing had fekking come from??? and travelled for many years across space to get here. Fekallbloodymighty and he poses as a Great Intellect on “The Einstein Factor”! He should be struck off, the man’s a dill.

Signed: Bert Einstein, Natimuk

And as for bloodyphillipbloodyadams with his smug superiority and his hysterical newspaper columns (example from a coupla years back: “Howard is going to lock up all the dissidents such as PA and throw the keys away”) Well, why didn’t you just lock up PA, Mr Howard?? An opportunity missed.

By: Adrien

Adrien — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 04:33:37 +0000

Fine - I don’t intend to say ‘you work in the Culture Industries and therefore you’re in no position to comment on them’. That would be silly. Also I have not made any generalisations about individuals just commented on the aggregate and I’ve made this very clear.
>
The thing is you simply aren’t allowed to criticize it from within so we have a spectacle where the discourse in magazines like Inside Film is little distinguishable from a gov/film apparatus press release. In fact I had a look at IF a month or so back and the editor and some gov/film suit whose name and rank escapes me were still crapping on about the Dalton Report’s ‘brilliant’ answer to why our scripts suck: too many writer-directors. Fascinating. This is eight fucking years after this ‘well-researched’ piece of tripe was presented at an AFC conference and there still going on about this irrellevency which they cherry-picked a handful of facts to make pertinent.
>
But the standard response is either to ignore criticism, hail it down with a chorus barrage or relegate it to some political arena where those uttering criticisms are somehow philistines. And it’s not off-topic. The Jabberfest of the Chosen Kilo’s s’possedly discussing the Farts but whatever. The result will be this. The present situation will continue with the same mediocre results and the outstanding talents will simply fly to LA as soon as they graduate.
>
Juan - It’as been tried dude and the result was not democracy. It was a tyranny in which you had to work much harder for much less. But good luck selling the paper.

By: Juan Castro

Juan Castro — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 04:01:09 +0000

Why do you expect e-democracy from a system that is clearly and explicitly designed to keep people away from decision making?

The only answer is an overthrow of this capitalist structure and the institution of a true workers democracy. This democracy would extend mass control of political decisions into the economic sphere where most of the important decisions (eg. what to produce and how) are currently made by rich people with profits on their mind.

By: Graham Bell

Graham Bell — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 11:20:14 +0000

Everyone;

Check out what’s happening at Ozideas [link]
and don’t forget to sign the petition.

By: darin

darin — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 09:47:41 +0000

Nasty….

I reserve the pistol for “unappreciated”

By: Lefty E

Lefty E — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 09:45:35 +0000

Whenever I hear the whinge “cultural industry” I reach for my pistol.

By: Fine

Fine — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 08:58:05 +0000

“Now if you’d care to tell me that Australian Cultural industry types are not literal minded, banality ridden worshippers of the excessively ordinary I’m all ears.”

Adrien, what do you want me to say? Everyone’s literal-minded blah, blah, blah… No-one’s literal-minded blah, blah, blah… Of course, all the thousands of people who work in the ‘Kulcha Industries’ are all the same. They’re universally brilliant. They’re universally terrible. It’s a set of ridiculous propositions and you know it.

And whatever I say you’ll have the wonderful fall-back position of , “But of course you work in the ‘Kulcha Industries’. Therefore you’re in no position to comment on them”. What’s the point of the conversation. Adrien?

Besides, it’s all a bit off topic for this thread.

I think I’ll finish my glass of wine and watch some bad television. What’s on tonight anyway?

By: wbb

wbb — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 08:40:44 +0000

Please also note I use different kinds of rhetoric.

Use tags then Adrien, if you find your audience is failing you.

By: Adrien

Adrien — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 05:37:54 +0000

Adrien …you’re passionate about facts. …you don’t like the facts

Fine - I’m not in my studio at the minute or I’d fetch out one of my favourite Emerson quotes about the banality of consistency. >
But you’re right it was not only unfair to pick on Ms Karvan it was also a bad example. I withdraw my specific comment about her, tho’ I haven’t been much impressed by anything she’s been in since High Tide in which she was outstanding. Fair enough?
>
And I’m also sorry for picking on you re literal mindedness but as a general assessment of the Oz Kulcha Industries I stand firm.
>
Please also note I use different kinds of rhetoric. There’s my non-fiction (fact-loving) rhetoric and there’s me being glib and snarky. The bit you quoted (starting this off) was in the latter category. Reality is not so specifically pertinent here. (Another problem with Oz Kulcha).
>
Now if you’d care to tell me that Australian Cultural industry types are not literal minded, banality ridden worshippers of the excessively ordinary I’m all ears.
>
Or perhaps we should restructure the funding. There’re too many writer-directors don’t you know. Who do these people think they are? Artists?

By: Graham Bell

Graham Bell — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 08:02:15 +0000

Everyone:

Let’s be fair. Some of the usual culprits might actually come up with worthwhile ideas [original, second-hand or plagarized] that could give us a better future.

By: Fine

Fine — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 06:31:40 +0000

Adrien, I’ve noted on a another thread that you’re passionate about facts. I thought I’d offer you a couple of fact. But it seems when you don’t like the facts, it’s just being literal-minded. On the other hand, you seem to think if you put a word in bold, or capitals, that makes it a fact. Sigh!

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 06:03:27 +0000

Get a room, please!

By: Adrien

Adrien — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 05:52:36 +0000

I’m still waiting on that intelligent retort Adrian. Having an opinion and expressing it well does not make me an egotist.

By: adrian

adrian — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 05:45:32 +0000

God you’re a bore sometimes, Adrien. I aint defending anything, just questioning your seemingly monumental ego.

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 05:33:58 +0000

Speaking of networking, anyone planning to go to the Saturday night drinkies and hide behind a pot plant with a camera for the binge drinking expose? Oh hang on, that’s only teh yoof, not the best and the brightest.

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 05:32:15 +0000

A bit of networking with some of the captains of industry who will be in attendance, perhaps?

I wonder what Prof. Fred Hilmer will be contributing - great ideas on how to sack journos and cut costs, scuttle the chance to establish an internet biz, write a tedious autobiography?

By: Geoff Honnor

Geoff Honnor — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 05:28:12 +0000

“It might also be private equity deals with the Murdoch brood.”

Well, Lachlan is going to be there as well, so there’s ample opportunity.

By: Adrien

Adrien — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 04:38:21 +0000

The usual high standard of wit and intellect we’ve all come to expect from you Adrian. The standard response to the criticism of the Oz Kulcha Industries is to defend it as if one were defending a handicapped friend from a clot of bigoted bullies. That’s telling.
>
We see no reason to defend underperforming atheletes in that fashion. Why? Because we aren’t pathologically insecure about our capacities to excel in sports. In culture? Another matter entirely. As individuals we aren’t mediocre. But collectively we are. The standard response to this is either denialism usually accompanied by that most laughable of retorts - you’re not qualified to say that. You have to be an ‘expert’ to make a judgment about taste do you old bean?
>
The other one is to host a Jabberfest in which the inevitable “let’s restructure the funding” bollocks gets paraded…
>
How ’bout this. NO. NOT GOOD ENOUGH.
>
I’ll say this for myself. I can compose a verse to fit a tune and when pointing out to someone that their verse doesn’t fit the tune I make sure that’s actually the case before blasting away. I have at the very least a modicum of skill you’veso far failed to demonstrate so perhaps you might practise the secular theology you encourage me to adhere to and stand at the sidelines in acknowledgement of your own deficiencies.
>
Or compose an intelligent retort even.

By: adrian

adrian — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 03:50:32 +0000

And how come you’re such a goddam friggin’ expert, Adrien?

Oh sorry, thta’s rght, you’re not.

By: Adrien

Adrien — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 03:15:49 +0000

But don’t let a few facts get in the way of your argument, Adrien.

Fine I’d like to add: total inability to comprehend anything except in the most literal minded fashion to my criticisms of Australian Kucha Industries. I don’t mean to pick on Ms Karvan in particular. She’s not particularly bad. She’s just not particularly good. But y’see it’s called a ‘provocational operation’. And what does it provoke?

Claudia’s a major spunk and a great actress

No. Cate Blanchett is a great actor. Al Pacino is a great actor. Claudia Karvan is ordinary.
>
Ordinary.
>
And so is 99% of the bullshit that passes for cultural production in this country Fine.
>
But I’m sure the Jabberfest of the Chosen Kilo’ll fix that right up. Not.