AdamC Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 [View:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMj_P_6H69g:560:315] "Through the very act of asking people, I connected with them. And when you connect with people, they want to help you. "
Rick Horton Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 She is all about me me me me me me me me me me me me me. Must be nice.
ribuck Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 She is all about me me me me me me me me me me me me me. Must be nice. Agreed! The subtext of every part of her talk is: "I'm so enlightened. I'm so wonderful. People worship me like a goddess. I'm so inspiring! I'm so brave! I'm so cool! ..." But her message is a good one: that creative people don't need the machinery of corporations and copyright and contracts and lawyers to succeed. If you give your fans what they want, and let them choose how to respond, the free market will let them reward you.
TheRobin Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 I didn't see any such subtext. How is talking about one's own experience as an example for a general concept necessarily implying that this means being self-centered or self-agrandising (however that's spelled correctly)?Especially since she didn't portray herself as a kind of person who's above it all with no concerns and always perfectly confident etc. but rather just talked about how she experienced trust/closeness and vulnerability towards strangers/fans.
Rick Horton Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 yeah, because she's a famous singer, so when she asks, she receives. Most regular people won't get, when they ask.
ribuck Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 I didn't see any such subtext. How is talking about one's own experience ... self-agrandising ...? To me, the "talking" is the main text. The "subtext" is her choice of what to talk about, the body language she used when talking about it, and the way she ends each anecdote at the point where she got a good outcome for herself from whatever she did. I also think it's self-aggrandising when she implies that she is so important and wonderful that she only needs to tweet about something and she gets it. She talked about the very poor family that gave her food and accommodation even though they really couldn't afford to. A less self-centered person would then have said something like "and in return I gave them a share of my earnings from that night's performance". Instead, she tells us how the next morning the poor family offered her even more things!
TheRobin Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 I get the feeling we were listening to two completely different videos here.I just listened to some parts again to see if I got it wrong, but it seems that no. She doesn't talk about how everything ended with a good oucome for (only) her (Those parts I relistened to didn't end that way, so the claim that she ends "each anecdote" that way is certainly incorrect.) the family wasn't in a state "where they couldn't afford it" (or if they where, then she didn't tell us that) and they really didn't offer her anything besides a bible (which imo is not quite an offering in that sense, but more a way of ,well, idk, being religiously irrational).So I have literally no idea where you draw those evidence from.I also don't see how talking about how she experienced twitter is implying that she is "so important and wonderful".
Guest NateC Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 I didn't see any such subtext. How is talking about one's own experience as an example for a general concept necessarily implying that this means being self-centered or self-agrandising (however that's spelled correctly)?Especially since she didn't portray herself as a kind of person who's above it all with no concerns and always perfectly confident etc. but rather just talked about how she experienced trust/closeness and vulnerability towards strangers/fans. Agreed. yeah, because she's a famous singer, so when she asks, she receives. Most regular people won't get, when they ask. Wouldn't you agree that she receives from others because she first provided value to others? Wouldn't you agree that when most regular people ask for something, they expect the help but offer no reciprocity? She talked about the very poor family that gave her food and accommodation even though they really couldn't afford to. A less self-centered person would then have said something like "and in return I gave them a share of my earnings from that night's performance". Instead, she tells us how the next morning the poor family offered her even more things! I might see her being self-centered if she accepted the food and accommodation and had no connection to those people, but she did have a connection and she provided them with her music. The food and accommodation were an exchange. No?
Rick Horton Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 I'm not really interested in why, are what. Her presentation was annoying. She could have had a better way to sell the idea for the "average" joe. I've seen a lot of people like her and I know her type.
ribuck Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 Wouldn't you agree that she receives from others because she first provided value to others? In the case of the poor family, apparently their daughter had received great value from her. So in that case, I agree. But in other cases it's not at all obvious. For example, the guy who gave Amanda Palmer the crate when she tweeted for it seemed to want to be photographed next to a famous person. Wouldn't you agree that when most regular people ask for something, they expect the help but offer no reciprocity? I would agree with that, except that I think most people would "hope for help" rather than "expect help". And most people who ask for help do so reluctantly, even though they may need help quite strongly. When Amanda Palmer asks for help, it's human nature to assume that she really needs the help, and I think that's part of why people respond so readily, whereas sometimes it seems she's just being lazy and would rather someone else did things for her. I get the feeling we were listening to two completely different videos here. Yes that seems the most likely explanation. And it's not really a video I want to watch a second time.
Guest NateC Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 Wouldn't you agree that when most regular people ask for something, they expect the help but offer no reciprocity? I would agree with that, except that I think most people would "hope for help" rather than "expect help". And most people who ask for help do so reluctantly, even though they may need help quite strongly. When Amanda Palmer asks for help, it's human nature to assume that she really needs the help, and I think that's part of why people respond so readily, whereas sometimes it seems she's just being lazy and would rather someone else did things for her. Ah, ok.
Rick Horton Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 She could have at least let the family have their own beds, even if the family offered. That's really bad taste. She should have said, no, I insist you all take your own beds since you're kind enough to have us for the night. THAT would have been a real message.
Belluavir Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 She could have at least let the family have their own beds, even if the family offered. That's really bad taste. She should have said, no, I insist you all take your own beds since you're kind enough to have us for the night. THAT would have been a real message. I agree, surely she, a young, healthy, well to do woman would be more suited to sleeping on the couch or living room floor than the children of a very poor family. I'm sure that if Kate Middleton tweeted that she needed someone to bring her a toilet brush in the next fifteen minutes, there would be a line of people with toilet brushes running out into the street, but I have a feeling that if I did the same, a tumble weed wouldn't even be fucked to blow past me in a mocking sort of way.
Arius Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 I suppose you never know who the people yelling "get a real job" are until you read the forum comments on an Amanda Palmer TED talk.
Guest NateC Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 I suppose you never know who the people yelling "get a real job" are until you read the forum comments on an Amanda Palmer TED talk. Yeah, the anger in this thread troubles me.
Rick Horton Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 I suppose you never know who the people yelling "get a real job" are until you read the forum comments on an Amanda Palmer TED talk. Nobody has yelled that. Maybe you shouldn't project.
Rick Horton Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 I suppose you never know who the people yelling "get a real job" are until you read the forum comments on an Amanda Palmer TED talk. Yeah, the anger in this thread troubles me. Again. I see a lot of projection. Nobody yelled "get a real job"
Guest NateC Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 I suppose you never know who the people yelling "get a real job" are until you read the forum comments on an Amanda Palmer TED talk. Yeah, the anger in this thread troubles me. Again. I see a lot of projection. Nobody yelled "get a real job" I'm being honest about how I feel. As I understand it, that is not projection.
Rick Horton Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 I suppose you never know who the people yelling "get a real job" are until you read the forum comments on an Amanda Palmer TED talk. Yeah, the anger in this thread troubles me. Again. I see a lot of projection. Nobody yelled "get a real job" I'm being honest about how I feel. As I understand it, that is not projection. honesty has nothing to do with projection. Whenever a person reads context where it isn't, a person is projecting. This is true because in order to come up with some kind of meaning where it wasn't explicitly given, that person must project FURTHER than what was said or written. Thus, you are projecting. Nobody yelled "get a real job", AND nobody was mean or bitter, or angry. Not based on anything written. Now, you can project whatever you want, but projecting can only come from the one who is doing the projecting, and in this case it is you and Arius. I'm not preaching. I'm pointing out is's and nothing more. Based on what she actually said in her presentation and no projections I judge her to be selfish. She exhibited a lack of understanding and compassion that most people who ask for things don't just "get" what they want. I have seen a lot of kickstart projects crash and burn and it wasn't because the people asking weren't nice, and didn't have a good project, it was just based on luck, popularity, and life. She is lucky and doesn't mention how lucky she is. She merely pointed out that she got stuff by making connections. But we all try and do that, so her point is really fucked up.
Guest NateC Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 honesty has nothing to do with projection. Whenever a person reads context where it isn't, a person is projecting. This is true because in order to come up with some kind of meaning where it wasn't explicitly given, that person must project FURTHER than what was said or written. Thus, you are projecting. Nobody yelled "get a real job", AND nobody was mean or bitter, or angry. Not based on anything written. Now, you can project whatever you want, but projecting can only come from the one who is doing the projecting, and in this case it is you and Arius. I'm not preaching. I'm pointing out is's and nothing more. Based on what she actually said in her presentation and no projections I judge her to be selfish. She exhibited a lack of understanding and compassion that most people who ask for things don't just "get" what they want. I have seen a lot of kickstart projects crash and burn and it wasn't because the people asking weren't nice, and didn't have a good project, it was just based on luck, popularity, and life. She is lucky and doesn't mention how lucky she is. She merely pointed out that she got stuff by making connections. But we all try and do that, so her point is really fucked up. Wait, so in all your comments towards the video, you felt no anger?
Arius Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 The phrase "get a real job", when yelled from a passing car, is not intended as helpful career advice (if it is, that's a very strange rhetorical technique). The statement is intended to shame the recipient into conforming to social norms. The phrase "real job" is intended to indicate that, whatever the performer is doing, it isn't actually productive work. Even the use of "get" is cruel in the statement. The phrase isn't "Have you ever considered finding a more lucrative pass time?" or "I'm not able to see the value in what you're doing."...No, it's a command and an insult, all at once. Any statement which implies (or directly states) that Amanda Palmer is behaving incorrectly is the emotional and social equivalent of driving by and yelling "get a job"...Cause really, what's the moral wrong in voluntarily crowdsourcing individual need resolution (That's almost the textbook anarchist ideal)? Using an appeal to cultural norms (to someone's face) is to a use of emotion and social pressure as a tool to establish control. In the case of (effectively) yelling "get a job" at a video, I can only view the effort as an attempt to establish a sense of superiority (moral, cultural, or emotional...I'm not quit sure). As-if, because she fails to conform to social norms, she is somehow less good than those who do conform. Any "She should X and shouldn't Y because <some reason>" type statement must be morally valid or it's just an attempt to tear someone down. Perhaps I'm wrong. I'd be more than willing to explore another explanation. That's just how it reads from where I'm sitting.
Rick Horton Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 honesty has nothing to do with projection. Whenever a person reads context where it isn't, a person is projecting. This is true because in order to come up with some kind of meaning where it wasn't explicitly given, that person must project FURTHER than what was said or written. Thus, you are projecting. Nobody yelled "get a real job", AND nobody was mean or bitter, or angry. Not based on anything written. Now, you can project whatever you want, but projecting can only come from the one who is doing the projecting, and in this case it is you and Arius. I'm not preaching. I'm pointing out is's and nothing more. Based on what she actually said in her presentation and no projections I judge her to be selfish. She exhibited a lack of understanding and compassion that most people who ask for things don't just "get" what they want. I have seen a lot of kickstart projects crash and burn and it wasn't because the people asking weren't nice, and didn't have a good project, it was just based on luck, popularity, and life. She is lucky and doesn't mention how lucky she is. She merely pointed out that she got stuff by making connections. But we all try and do that, so her point is really fucked up. Wait, so in all your comments towards the video, you felt no anger? Angry about?
Rick Horton Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 Any statement which implies (or directly states) that Amanda Palmer is behaving incorrectly is the emotional and social equivalent of driving by and yelling "get a job" See. That's projection... Yelling "get a job" is yelling get a job. Nothing else somebody says equals yelling "get a job". I don't think anybody who's noticed she seems more into herself than the average person is telling her to get a real job. I'm going out on a limb, maybe, but I'll ask the forum, " Does anybody think she needs to get a real job?" Because, really, I don't, and I don't even care about her job.
ribuck Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 Wait, so in all your comments towards the video, you felt no anger? I felt no anger, either while watching the video or posting comments. I thought we were discussing her personality. I tend to avoid spending time with very self-centered people, because I find it unsatisfying being with them, but that's nothing to do with anger.
Arius Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 Yelling "get a job" is yelling get a job. Nothing else somebody says equals yelling "get a job". I don't think anybody who's noticed she seems more into herself than the average person is telling her to get a real job. I'm going out on a limb, maybe, but I'll ask the forum, " Does anybody think she needs to get a real job?" Because, really, I don't, and I don't even care about her job. It's not career advice. There's a bit more to it than that. When a group of people drive past a gay couple and yell "Go to hell f*gs!", should we assume it's a genuine suggestion of metaphisical activity? Or, if a shop keeper says "We don't serve n*ggers", should we take the statement as the social equivelent of "We don't have any bread to sell", as being purely informational? Really now, that's just silly. I think it should (ooo....) be clear to everyone what the difference between insult, demand, and suggestion actually is. But maybe I'm wrong, we could explore that. Perhaps it is tricky to identify the difference.
ribuck Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 Does anybody think she needs to get a real job? Provided she's being peaceful, I don't care whether she has a job or not.
Rick Horton Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 Yelling "get a job" is yelling get a job. Nothing else somebody says equals yelling "get a job". I don't think anybody who's noticed she seems more into herself than the average person is telling her to get a real job. I'm going out on a limb, maybe, but I'll ask the forum, " Does anybody think she needs to get a real job?" Because, really, I don't, and I don't even care about her job. It's not career advice. There's a bit more to it than that. When a group of people drive past a gay couple and yell "Go to hell f*gs!", should we assume it's a genuine suggestion of metaphisical activity? Or, if a shop keeper says "We don't serve n*ggers", should we take the statement as the social equivelent of "We don't have any bread to sell", as being purely informational? Really now, that's just silly. I think it should (ooo....) be clear to everyone what the difference between insult, demand, and suggestion actually is. But maybe I'm wrong, we could explore that. Perhaps it is tricky to identify the difference. I don't know, but nobody here has told her to get a real job. I'm right there with Ribuck. I don't care if she's employed or not. It's not the basis I judge people by.
Rick Horton Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 Yelling "get a job" is yelling get a job. Nothing else somebody says equals yelling "get a job". I don't think anybody who's noticed she seems more into herself than the average person is telling her to get a real job. I'm going out on a limb, maybe, but I'll ask the forum, " Does anybody think she needs to get a real job?" Because, really, I don't, and I don't even care about her job. It's not career advice. There's a bit more to it than that. When a group of people drive past a gay couple and yell "Go to hell f*gs!", should we assume it's a genuine suggestion of metaphisical activity? Or, if a shop keeper says "We don't serve n*ggers", should we take the statement as the social equivelent of "We don't have any bread to sell", as being purely informational? Really now, that's just silly. I think it should (ooo....) be clear to everyone what the difference between insult, demand, and suggestion actually is. But maybe I'm wrong, we could explore that. Perhaps it is tricky to identify the difference. Wait hold on. I didn't say career advice. Again, more projecting. Nobody is saying that people who yell awful things from car windows are being literall or caring. I don't even know what your point is although you're definitely reading things into this conversation that just aren't being said by anybody.
Arius Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 I don't even know what your point is although you're definitely reading things into this conversation that just aren't being said by anybody. My point is, it is surprising how much disapproval toward Amanda Palmer's unconventional approach has been expressed here. I see the one (opinion-based disapproval on a forum) as a lite version of the other other (insults from car windows). The only difference between the two is the volume of expression. And I though I'd try a little rhetoric to illustrate the point.
Guest NateC Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 I don't even know what your point is although you're definitely reading things into this conversation that just aren't being said by anybody. My point is, it is surprising how much disapproval toward Amanda Palmer's unconventional approach has been expressed here. I see the one (opinion-based disapproval on a forum) as a lite version of the other other (insults from car windows). The only difference between the two is the volume of expression. And I though I'd try a little rhetoric to illustrate the point. Arius, As I understand ribuck, Moncaloono, Belluavir, their objection is not of her unconventional approach (which is what confused me), their objection is to her personality. So, their stated evidence that she is self-centered is:-She talks mostly about herself in the presentation-She asks for things and gets a good outcome for herself-Her body language during the presentation-She took the bed
Arius Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 As I understand ribuck, Moncaloono, Belluavir, their objection is not of her unconventional approach (which is what confused me), their objection is to her personality. Well said. Fair enough, I'll revise my point to better fit this information. *My point is, it is surprising how much disapproval toward Amanda Palmer's personality has been expressed here. I see the one (opinion-based disapproval on a forum) as a lite version of the other other (insults from car windows). The only difference between the two is the volume of expression. It's possible that I react in this way because I know more about Amanda Palmer than is revealed in this video. I doubt there's much of a readership overlap between this forum and The Bloggess...it might just be me. Anyway, here's a little extra back story on Amanda Palmer. Something strangely kind she did for someone one time. (IMHO) She really does seem like a caring person, at least to her friends and fans. Directly addressing the evidentiary points: She is sharing stories of her life to illustrate a strategic point about give-and-take in business. It would be tough to tell an autobiographical story about someone besides the speaker. I hope everyone gets good outcomes for themselves when they ask for things. That's a good thing. I can't speak to body language. She's a performer, they're all strange. I don't believe there are sufficient details revealed in the video to make a judgement on the bed-taking situation.
Guest NateC Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 It's possible that I react in this way because I know more about Amanda Palmer than is revealed in this video. I doubt there's much of a readership overlap between this forum and The Bloggess...it might just be me. Anyway, here's a little extra back story on Amanda Palmer. Something strangely kind she did for someone one time. (IMHO) She really does seem like a caring person, at least to her friends and fans. Cool story.
nathanm Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 (I own two Dresden Dolls CDs and a DVD, that's the extent of my knowledge of Amanda Palmer.) I see nothing wrong with her talk, it's just about an artist providing value to the fans, being kind and generous and using current technology to connect with people. Giving stuff away for free and asking for donations? Gee, I wonder where else we might have heard of such a business model? Self-centered? Well yeah, of course it's about her experience. Who else is she supposed to talk about? I'm sure you could find a hundred other celebrity type people who are far more self-absorbed in an annoying, hypocritical manner. She produces stuff other people want and has earned rewards for it. I think if anything the talk is endearing and makes up for my annoyance and eye-rolling at her typical lefty admonition to vote prior to their otherwise ass-kicking cover of War Pigs. (She won too, as we know the saintly Obama has done nothing at all warlike during his office unlike that big meanie Bush. Yay!) The bed thing; this is completely subjective based on the situtation. Sometimes it's nice to decline someone's generosity, other times you are being insulting by doing so. You have to take that sort of thing on a case-by-case basis. Usually if someone is doing something nice for you, but you think it's TOO nice, I think it's best to decline and defer a bit at first just to establish some humbleness, but if they continue insisting then accept it graciously. No need to start a back and forth argument that accelerates into needless unpleasantness.
Rick Horton Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 (I own two Dresden Dolls CDs and a DVD, that's the extent of my knowledge of Amanda Palmer.) I see nothing wrong with her talk, it's just about an artist providing value to the fans, being kind and generous and using current technology to connect with people. Giving stuff away for free and asking for donations? Gee, I wonder where else we might have heard of such a business model? Self-centered? Well yeah, of course it's about her experience. Who else is she supposed to talk about? I'm sure you could find a hundred other celebrity type people who are far more self-absorbed in an annoying, hypocritical manner. She produces stuff other people want and has earned rewards for it. I think if anything the talk is endearing and makes up for my annoyance and eye-rolling at her typical lefty admonition to vote prior to their otherwise ass-kicking cover of War Pigs. (She won too, as we know the saintly Obama has done nothing at all warlike during his office unlike that big meanie Bush. Yay!) The bed thing; this is completely subjective based on the situtation. Sometimes it's nice to decline someone's generosity, other times you are being insulting by doing so. You have to take that sort of thing on a case-by-case basis. Usually if someone is doing something nice for you, but you think it's TOO nice, I think it's best to decline and defer a bit at first just to establish some humbleness, but if they continue insisting then accept it graciously. No need to start a back and forth argument that accelerates into needless unpleasantness. I agree with that.
Recommended Posts