Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

An interesting thing I didn't know until today

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by ursus arctos View Post
    They were created and produced by the sane couple
    I spent some time wondering whether "the sane couple" was a terminology I should know and who they might be, before realising this was almost certainly a typo for "the same couple".

    Comment


      Sorry about that

      Comment


        Originally posted by Balderdasha View Post

        I've never seen that on UK TV.
        We just had Tingha and Tucker

        Comment


          Ho ho, Auntie Jean...

          Comment


            I'm not sure that a broader range of university education really does much, based on the Americans (and Brits) that I know. I don't detect a difference in broadness of knowledge between the two sets, it seems more based on a particular person's interest regardless of whether they had to study more subjects in university or high school or not. Certainly not a sample representative of the general population on either side of the Atlantic, though.

            I am quite surprised about the lack of David knowledge exhibited on this thread, and I'm not meaning to be judgmental about it if I come across that way.

            Comment


              That's an interesting observation and I wonder if your experience in this regard is largely a function of your field.

              Comment


                Possibly. It is the case that the Americans set skews more within my field than the British set does.

                Comment


                  That makes sense to me.

                  I have also been surprised at the near complete lack of any meaningful knowledge of maths or science among some of my colleagues, especially the younger ones.

                  As a general rule, there are more "Mickey Mouse" courses available to satisfy "science" requirements at US universities than is the case with art or music.

                  Comment


                    I'm not sure I know what SA's field is.

                    Originally posted by S. aureus View Post
                    I am quite surprised about the lack of David knowledge exhibited on this thread, and I'm not meaning to be judgmental about it if I come across that way.
                    Me too. But I figured that was more to do with my age. Though obviously an art school training helped too.

                    Comment


                      It is a hard science

                      Comment


                        As a deeply nerdy 16 year old, I was absolutely delighted to have an incredibly narrow sciencey specialisation where I never had to write a coherent sentence and could just do applied maths in various forms.

                        Only retrospectively do I think I might have benefited from being forced to write stuff, and read stuff. And only retrospectively do I think I might have enjoyed learning some history and so on. Although I actually think I'd much rather learn all that stuff now, when I'm interested and care about it, than have it been wasted on me as a late teen.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by ursus arctos View Post
                          For Buddhism, I would argue that that depends on which version of rebirth one subscribes to.
                          Stephen Batchelor's thoughts on this are interesting.

                          Buddhist core beliefs - Noble Truths, Eigthfold Path, Anātman, Emptiness - aren't intrinsically religious but in (pretty much) every incarnation I've encountered, Buddhist practice is syncretic and combines theistic beliefs and practices. What Batchelor called the cultural superstructure seems to inflect local/regional practices far more than the Dharma. I have a big knowledge gap as far as beliefs among white US Buddhists are concerned, but my experience of the "Californian" approach seems to be another manifestation of this. (This may be unfair.)

                          Comment


                            I don't even think that's turned up on any of our religious TV channels. Maybe the fact that it was produced by a specific denomination counted against it.

                            Comment


                              I am not an expert either, but would say that white US Buddhists are a rather eclectic group, with many different sects/schools/traditions being represented and none being dominant. Some can be rather fetishistic about "authenticity". Others can be extremely syncretic/comnercial.

                              I would attribute your sense to the fact that the latter tend to be much louder and better funded than the former.

                              I would also tend to use "Hollywood/LA" rather than "California" for that version, but that could well be a reflection of my own regional biases.
                              Last edited by ursus arctos; 28-05-2023, 20:34.

                              Comment


                                OK here's a question:

                                Back in the mid-60s a very successful pair of songwriters: Roger Greenaway and Roger Cook, recorded a few Top 10 hits under the name of David and Jonathon. My friends and I were in our mid-teens at the time and — whether from state schools, or private schools — we all instantly got both the reference and the implication. So, I wonder, do you think would that be the case today among a similar age group in the UK or USA?

                                Comment


                                  They'd also spell Jonathan incorrectly :-)

                                  [one of my pet peeves - apologies]

                                  EDIT: although the original language may omit the 'h' (such as in the Hebrew and Aramaic spellings) the ending is always 'an' in the sources and languages of which I'm aware; "on" has to be a corruption that occurred later:

                                  https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Jonathan_(name)

                                  You'll understand why this is something that I have researched a fair bit.
                                  Last edited by Satchmo Distel; 28-05-2023, 20:56.

                                  Comment


                                    Originally posted by Amor de Cosmos View Post
                                    ...we all instantly got both the reference and the implication.
                                    Will there be hints later?

                                    Comment


                                      Originally posted by S. aureus View Post
                                      I am quite surprised about the lack of David knowledge exhibited on this thread.
                                      About the statue itself or about the Biblical figure...or both?

                                      Comment


                                        US teens raised in evangelical households would definitely get the reference, as would many raised in mainstream Protestantism of the "Vacation Bible School" variety. Rather less likely among Ctholics, not to mention non-Christians (Orthodox Jews would also get it, but be unlikely to encounter the music).

                                        I think that this is a good illustration of the stark difference between your generation and that of Balders' daughter.

                                        Comment


                                          For WOM

                                          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_and_Jonathan

                                          I imagine that among GTA youth of today, a slightly greater number would first think of

                                          Comment


                                            Originally posted by ursus arctos View Post
                                            For WOM.
                                            I'm good on the reference. It's the implication I'm fuzzy on. It would seem to telegraph that they're a gay duo, but reading doesn't seem to bear that out.

                                            Comment


                                              That's the inference. Though it was rarely spelled out in class, except in very broadminded liberal schools (like the one La Signora went to.) But, as adolescents we all "got it" anyway. Partly I think because Parliament was about to debate The Sexual Offences Act, which would legalise homosexuality between consenting adults, so there was tons of discussion in the Press (I know you remember the Press...; ) ) Also in homes.

                                              Comment


                                                The line between intense fraternal love and erotic love has always been blurred.

                                                Greenaway, Cook and Tony Burrows had all been in The Kestrels as teenagers. Greenaway and Cook then became songwriters but then cashed in on Beatlemania with their duo, covering 'Michelle'.

                                                Comment


                                                  Originally posted by WOM View Post

                                                  About the statue itself or about the Biblical figure...or both?
                                                  Both, really.

                                                  Comment


                                                    Benjamin Britten wrote Seven Sonnets of Michelangelo for his partner and lead singer Peter Pears.​

                                                    The condolences the Queen sent Pears after Britten died may have been the first time that British royalty acknowledged a gay couple, albeit tacitly.
                                                    Last edited by Satchmo Distel; 28-05-2023, 23:17.

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X