Muldfeld said:But it's all artists can do, and you have to recognize that this is what motivates all great artists
Actually, no, I don't recognize that. Some great artists are motivated by a desire to improve their world. Most are motivated by the desire to express themselves artistically.
I used to get so excited about politicians changing the world, but I've felt so let down -- most recently by Obama and Clinton -- because they are so tempted to do anything to win. We have to get to the root causes and impoact the underlying culture.
TV and movies have a huge influence in our lives, and have an educational fuction, whether good or bad.
I think you give movies and TV too much weight. I know I don't speak for everyone here, but I know I'm not alone when I say that I can't think of any movie or TV show that has actually changed how I live my life.
Bush's entire conception of machismo comes from TV, movies and stereotypes about what a man or leader should be that have been spread through media.
That's an awfully big assumption to make, and one I don't really agree with. I feel his machismo comes more from his own inner stubborness and refusal to see the other side than it does from any entertainment he may have watched.
Fictional notions of good versus evil are what has led to a far more brutal US policy than would otherwise occur.
I don't entirely disagree with you here, but
These shows fight against that supposition and provide a new form of understanding...
These shows are among the very few that can help reverse the decades of damage from natioanalist TV. It may be a small part of the puzzle, but it's something, and it's something unquestionably positive, and I believe in these writers for doing this, and I support them in their quest
First, there are far worse things contributing to our foreign policy blunders than fictional notions of good and evil. Unfortunate stereotypes from entertainment sources are not our main concern in this area (and are at best an extremely minor contributor). Again, you give entertainment, especially weekly, fictional TV series waaaay too much importance.
Secondly, BSG is not the first show to explore and question the human condition. It's not as if there was a black hole of intelligent TV prior to BSG. So I don't buy this "new form of understanding" you seem to think it provides. Is it a good thing that BSG promotes looking at the world with a critical but balanced eye? Undoubtedly yes. But do you honestly think that everyone who watches BSG transforms their world view because of it? Undoubtedly no. I'd even go so far as to say the majority don't. In fact, I think the majority of people who watch BSG already agree with the social commentary being made.
As for their "quest," what quest? Do you really believe the writers are out there trying to change the world, one show at a time? A minor shift in perspective may be a side effect of good writing, but if you're really honest here, changing the world is not the reason they're doing this show, because, quite frankly, you'd have to be delusional to believe that a weekly TV series would have the power to do that.
What I said to Mr. Lanois was not futile. It was a fan of art communicating to an artist how much that art had affected him. I'm quite sure he understood very well how important that motivation was. And I think U2 would fall in love with these shows and it might help them write better, more complexely true lyrics. In this way, the message of one medium would affect another. U2 often have literary and film inspirations for their songs. What I did was completely rational and I'm proud I did it.
BVS covered this already, but do you really think BSG is in the same level of inspiration as the references that often pop up in their work? Do you really think that BSG is so relevatory that Bono is suddenly going to write more complex lyrics for watching it? That's just plain unrealistic.
It's an outstanding tv show, without a doubt. But to think it could somehow be our cultural savior if only more people watched it is just ridiculous.