New Art

I think I may have finally come to agreement with the notion of there being nothing new in art. This doesn't mean that new art cannot be provocative or inspiring, but that I highly doubt there will be any new ways to apply paint to canvas, words to paper, or chisels to stone. Most, if not all, art will likely be derivative of something, whether that something be comic books, religious icons, or Greek pottery, doesn't really matter. What will matter is creating something that still speaks to the current age and hopefully to future ages. I am also fairly certain that this notion stretches across all disciplines, from poetry to painting to sculpture to music.

Ephemeral Reading

The recent shuttering of Geocities brings something up which I don't think many people have truthfully considered in the grand realm of "free" Internet services. If Geocities managed to last ten years or so after its heyday, what sort of lifespan will blogs experience. The Geocities article points out that cost probably wasn't the reason for the shuttering, but rather that there was no profit in keeping it open. How far back will Blogger, Blogspot, and other sites decide to store data, and at some point, will they charge for maintaining it? I think the same article mentions the average audience size for blogs is one person, which would indicate little ad revenue from the majority of pages maintained. Considering many, if not most, are like this blogger in the their frequency of updates, and you have the reason for so few readers of any given blog. Why go back if nothing changes? The odd thing, from the writer's perspective, is why keep writing if there isn't anyone reading, so you have your vicious circle. There may be an answer here, if one considers some of the successful blogs, they tend to be quite focused (DailyKos) or project driven (like the one that became Julie & Julia), meaning their audience is fairly specific. Then again, if you turn your blogging into a business or a novel, you no longer are concerned with what the free service's corporate parent will do years down the line with your material. Perhaps some bloggers have already considered this issue and are keeping their own copies of what they write on personal hard drives, and then backing those up appropriately, but with the recent removal of geocites from the web, perhaps now isn't a bad time to consider if you want to keep your old entries, and if so, how you will go about doing it.

Marriage, Gay or Otherwise

In reading the linked article I was disappointed. As a gay resident of Washington the fact that our state government will recognize a committed relationship regardless of if the partners are of the opposite sex is a big deal. Now if we can get the state out of the marriage business altogether, life would be so much better. If marriage is a sacrament, then our government, with its theoretical division between church and state should have no role in declaring what is and isn't a marriage, but if it needs to define relationships and families for legal purposes, then by all means, there are a plethora of non emotionally charged legalistic phrases they could use, and let the church keep marriage. By letting individual churches decide what constitutes marriage, most couples are likely to find a sympathetic pastor who will perform the ceremony.

Personally, I don't see gay marriage leading to anything but gay divorce, and while I am sure to be pilloried, I doubt I am the only person who has ever proposed this.

I found it peculiar

I should still be thinking about roughly the same things I was thinking about four months ago. If the problem had resolved itself, I probably wouldn't still be thinking about it, but I doubt the problem will solve itself outside of the foreseeable future, and when it does resolve itself, there will be a moderate-right party. I am not saying there won't be a far right party, but there are too many socially liberal fiscally conservative folks out there with no real representation, as the party of Lincoln is no longer functioning in that respect.

Thoughts on media and rationality

I have been wondering lately, if Fox News didn't make loads of money by being right leaning, would they actually balance things out, or perhaps lean left if that brought them the cash? Honestly, I would bet they would go where the money is, as after all, they are good free market capitalists, or so they claim. That being said, I doubt there will ever be good money on the left, generally because the left is willing to debate rationally rather than emotionally. From what I have seen of Fox, they do not look at things from a rational right wing perspective, but from an emotional right wing perspective. My guess is that rational Republicans tend to be far too moderate, but this is only a hypothesis.

Air America was/is an attempt at a successful left-wing talk radio business model. It hasn't made money, but how do you make money trying to discuss issues when you aren't yelling and creating a commotion. Of course, many of Air America's target audience probably already get their news from NPR, and if you have the news, in a relatively straight forward format, one can come to one's own opinion of its effects. Not to say that on something complex like regulatory legislation, some expert commentary isn't appreciated to help decipher the complexities, but in most cases people figure things out on their own, and aren't put out by creating their own opinions.

Maybe I am wrong, but I also doubt the left looks for talk radio to be strictly entertainment, and would prefer if it is going to attempt to be info-tainment, then it should fall heavier on the info part of that portmanteau.

Getting bent out of shape happens on both sides of the fence, hence overkill with political correctness on the left and equating public health care with death camps on the right. When either side reaches the ridiculous, one might as well give up any hope of rational debate, though one doesn't necessarily need to concede. Oddly, when dealing with someone far to the emotional side, they don't even want to allow you to settle with an agreement to disagree, and without this nod, civility becomes strained.