Just a point of interest

[TheMadMuse]

This website seems a little radical (Scientology), but I thought it gives good insight on the issues that people in the creative fields deal with when it comes to discrimination from 'normal society'.It also points out the necessity of original work in life. It's a good read and may inspire you to make more music--fearlessly.

http://www.cchr.org/art/eng/page00.htm

[lonewolf]

Didn't John Fogerty used to play with them?



But seriously, there is some creedence to Hubbard's legacies and the whole idea of an all out attack on psychobabble (the root of political correctness) sounds like fun.

[bassist_25]

I've always had huge issues with Hubbard's psuedo-religion, but I have even bigger problems with his psuedo-pyschology. For a long time I wasn't even aware of what Hubbard was about; I remember the Dianetics book being advertised on TV, and I knew that Maynard James Keenan had a lot of animosity towards him. So naturally, my inquisitive nature took over and I wanted to know what this guy was about. The first thing I read was his "theory" about the Active and Reactive mind. Now, keep in mind, I'll be majoring in pysch this year, so I have a strong interest in everything pyschology/socialology. As I read further into his "theory" I noticed that nothing made sense. His theory wasn't logical at all. Whenever Freud illustrates a model, I understand it; whenever Jung illustrates a model, I understand it; even when Timothy Leary, or Robert Anton Wilson are pyschobabbling about this or that, I understand it. For the life of me, I couldn't figure out what the hell this guy was talking about. As I researched deeper, I figured out that his psuedo-pyschology and Dianetics were just fronts into his very expensive brain-washing seminars. I'm not here to knock religion, but c'mon, do people really believe that bad feelings are caused by attached spirits that died in a nuclear holocaust? I've always had trouble swallowing intergalactic theologies, whether it's Heaven's Gate or Urancha, but I've always said, "Live and let live", when it comes to people's faith. (not matter how out there, they are) But Scientology is nothing but manipulation coupled with a very lucrative money-making scheme.

So in the words of MJK: Fuck L. Ron Hubbard, and fuck all of his clones.

The website does look interesting, though. I really don't have time to skim through it now, but I'll probaly check it out tonight. I notice that they talk about giving children ritalin; I've always been a big critic on pushing pills on people that have problems that obviousl stem from cognitive causes, and not neurological ones. It should be an interesting read.

[TheMadMuse]

I don't really ascribe to Scientology values.....I'm just interested in what people are saying about all creative people being mad (okay...so what if we are). I do not believe in endless pill pushing and over medication....granted people need what people need, but do they (especially children) deserve to be medicated into submission? There has to be something wrong with messing around with a child's developing brain chemistry. I also came across this..

http://www.positivehealth.com/permit/Ar ... litt24.htm

[bassist_25]

Oh, I wasn't trying to slam on you about Scientology; it's just that Hubbard was brought up so I had to go off on my "Hubbard is a psuedo-pyschologist" tangent.

As musicians and performers, we have definately chosen an unorthodox life. My mantra is Willie Nelson's famous words, "The night life ain't a good life, but it's my life". To stack that on top of things, I have an INTJ personality. There's a whole 2% of people in the population that think like I do. Talk about being an idiosyncrasy. I'm introverted; logical to the point of being cold; strongly against authority; and have no need for social/cultural rituals. You can probaly imagine how hard it's been for me to find a niche in life.

Creative people spend a great deal of time in both the left and right hemispheres of their cerebral cortexes. This probaly has a lot to do with their unique view on the world.

[bassist_25]

I just read the second webpage, and found it very interesting.

I disagree with completely disregarding Freud's theories on sexual repression. While Freud was obsessed with sex, (Which is the reason why a lot of his collegues, such as Jung and Adler, left to form their own schools of Pyschotherapy) his theories are not completely without artistic merit. This would especially be true in Surrealist art, since the foundation of it is based on Freudian theory. (Not to mention that Salvidor Dali would place himself into a quasi-deranged state of mind that he dubbed "The Critical-Paranoid Method") We all have an intrinsic want to procreate, so it would be short-sighted to think that those tendencies wouldn't surface in creative thought. There's a reason why they wouldn't film Elvis Presely from the waist down.

I found the existentist view that the artist creates his own vision reality, to be fascinating.

[TheMadMuse]

I think the point of pure creation out of self is finding a way to express the vision you have....like creating a piece of music to reflect a mood you have. In great art that mood is easily conveyed by the performer...and easily felt by the viewer. Performance art (which is what I like and do best) is sharing the personal view in an intimate way and works best in an intimate setting. The guys that I ask to play the music for the piece are basically told if they don't agree with what I'm saying or doing...they can convey that with the music they play along with the piece, they compose their own stuff. I've been lucky enough to have good musicians (a bassist, guitarist, and drummer) lay down thier ideas/feelings in a manner that makes the show a whole experience. If having a woman rant about the necessity of madness in art and life isn't enough, there's a driving force of sound behind it. I don't resort to nudity (most Performance artists do) because I feel the society around us is still puritanical enough to lose the message if I did...and I really don't find it necessary to the material. Henry Rollins, who also does performance art, says in one of his pieces that he wants to be the the old lunatic on the corner....why wait till you're old. Anyway...I don't subject myself to personality testing (okay, an occasional trip to tickle.com doesn't count) I would be afraid to find out I'm completely sane....but I think I am sane in the sense I'm a realist. In my world however reality ends at the front door and we shed the 'show' we put on and act like real people. I don't think it's lying to people about who you are...it's survivng in a world made up of Joe Shmoo. I don't look for people like me...I like to make my own ride...and try to keep it pretty simple. I think it's important to keep one foot in and one foot out, and make up the rest as you go along. As far as psycology...I'm more Jungian than Freud....but in the end we do choose how we live, we like what we like,and explore what we don't so we have at least an understanding of why.

[ZappasXWife]

The comments about ADHD were interesting to say the least, especially the implication that this disease does not exist? Some points made were valid, but others show me that the author has probably never had a child with this disease. Probably has 'golden children'. And everyone knows those children never grow up to be drug addicts, only ones who are on a safe dose of ritalin to help them pay attention. (??) His argument that because there is no defining diagnosis this is not a real disease is ridiculous. I guess Alzheimer's disease is not real then, either...or OCD or Epstein-Barre...and his comment

Had the vast majority of these children learned to read properly utilizing phonics, they would never have been labeled as having ADHD or any other “learning disorder.”

just confuses me...my child has always been an excellent reader, and she does have ADD (wanna spend the day with her?) . And because she was in Catholic school her first 7 years of school, she DID learn to read with a combination of memorization and phonics. This disease has nothing to do with intelligence or even with the ability (or inability)to learn specific subjects. That can be different for every kid.

[TheMadMuse]

I believe that mental illness and learning problems exsist...so I agree it's crazy to say these problems don't occur. My own father's family is struck by Alzheimer's and I've seen my uncles loose everything. I have worked with children that have learning/social problems in after school programs by teaching them theatre and a little pride in themselves, but it doesn't solve a whole problem. My argument is more for people who are okay, but end up being medicated because they are a little bent. There are extremes, but feeding lithium to an adult/child should be a last resort...not a first. I am a lucky parent so far...my daughter is the most pleasent child, and very bright. I sometimes wonder if she's even mine...I try very hard to involve her in the creative arts so that maybe someday she can vent her frustration in a manner that is healthy. I know it's pretty beans and rice, but I myself have learned to make horrible events into something beautiful. Would being medicated take that urge away? My vengance in matters that disturb me is to say something about it in my artform, my word is my best weapon and my best defense. When I have given middleschool kids a way to vent thier problems...they have done better in school, they feel better about themselves...it may not always work, and that's when therapy could be helpful, and possibly medication. But there are cases when children/adults are just perscribed something right away. Perscriptions like Zoloft, Paxil, and Prozac have been proven recently to increase the risk of suicide within the first few weeks of taking it - does this make sense? Drug companies show all the good results of a drug...but have never been forced to show the negative. So they don't. Does anyone remember what the world was like before pills? Most great artist were walking misery...but they still made beautiful things. And even after thier untimely demises their legends live on. And I'm not even refering to Kurt Cobain (he's a little overrated)...I'm more along the lines of Hemmingway, Poe, Van Gogh,Artaud or musicians like Joplin or Hendrix. The way they lived contributed to thier art...and it's what made them great. How do we decide today what meds to pass out to destroy legacies of greatness. And how young should they be?

[bassist_25]

The archetype of the tortured artist is surely a romantic one, but depression is a terrible state of mind, no matter how you look at it. Personally, I think society puts to much emphasis on the artist, and not enough on the art. But I disgress before I go off on one of my existiantial/Buddhist rants about self-identification and the ego.

Does ADD truly exist? I don't know; I haven't taken an objective look at all sides. But as I stated earlier, you can't tell me that everyone who winds up on pyschological medication has a neurological problem. I know plenty of people with problems that are obviously cognitive, but still are prescribed MAOI inhibitors. The sad part is, they will never truly overcome their mental problems because the drugs they are on are merely placebos while the underlying cause will always remain. But then it becomes of question of the end result; Should people with mental problems still be given medication because their problems cannot be immediatley solved with classical pyschology? My cousin is schizophrenic, dillusional, illusional, and suffers from an electra complex. (Yes, it truly does exist; she hates her mother because she's in love with her father) She's on a ton of medication; and while it doesn't solve her problems, it keeps her on a semi-functioning basis.

[HurricaneBob]

Nothing like a good ole blood letting........thats what i always say.