<Italy like Ryanair: can it exist with oil over $ 100 per barrel? The Oil Drum DrumBeat: August 15, 2008>

178 comments on Geopolitical Disruptions #1: Theory of Disruptions to Oil & Resource Supply

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

memmel on August 14, 2008 - 5:26pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I disagree in the past people handed their fine china down from one generation to the next not only did it have monetary value but it picked up tremendous sentimental value. Or it was presented as a wedding gift and this invoked feelings every time it was used etc.

It was not a price issue although price/cost and limited availability ensured that china could be used as this sort of gift.

Mass production destroys these concepts. Look at the McMansion craze in housing. Large homes used to be custom homes built for people with real wealth and generally speaking they where works of art ( Often ugly but )

The McMansion destroyed this concept and created the middle class mansion instead that probably will decay rapidly because of its cheap construction.

So all value has been lost.

Another thing one reason that ELP (Economize Localize Produce) is so attractive is that local production naturally ensures that what is produced is resource constrained at some level. This constraint is really about getting back to making works of art not mass produced garbage. And I'm not talking about the physical serviceability of mass produced work such such a china vs hand made china. I'm talking about this concept of treasuring and in a sense respecting the giving a long life to something every time we change the value of the raw materials by applying energy and creative thinking.

Every time a object no matter how mundane is made by hand you have the chance for human inspiration to create something new and different. Mass production destroys this. What we treasure is this embodiment of human thought and skill in a object and with that its treasured art and more often a unique capturing of a thought whim or even more important concept or breakthrough.

Localization and by default constrained and limited production brings this back.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
RobinPC on August 14, 2008 - 7:38pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I agree there is some validity in your reply. But it is a largely subjective thing and depends on the person. And meanwhile the teacups are still teacups that hold the same amount of tea just as solidly.

A person such as myself recognises a thing for its beauty and usefulness. I don't care how cheap it was or how mass-produced.

I'd like to cite an example. I have 2 Bechstein model 5 (= model 10) pianos. The market price of these is relatively low because ignorant people (= the vast majority) assume that non-overstrung pianos are inferior. But I myself just recognised outstanding, brilliantly-designed pianos for what they were - it is so rare to find pianos that have good uniform tone etc., let alone with a smaller size too. Only later via the internet did I learn that expert others with the required discernment of quality recognise these as some of the best pianos ever made (and in my experience there are far more Bechstein 5s/10s than any other model of any make, a reflection of that fact). Personally I don't give a fig that the ignorant assume these to be less valuable, more fool them. By the way, quality pianos have been in great part mass-produced for the past 150 years, big deal. The higher the quality the masser the production (because huge research and expertise is involved)!

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
andybts on August 15, 2008 - 7:40am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Good observations. I've thought about a related concept in regards to digital reproduction of art.

In the recent past the (audio) quality of recorded music would decline over time, and there was little that could be done about it. Now with digital storage, it can be copied and what's more, distributed around the world in an identical state. Does it lose value through this, or gain it?

As a musician, I'm socially dissuaded from investing all my time in songwriting/performing, because so much music is available due to modern distribution channels (internet/tv music channels/radio). I think my inclination to write/perform comes - to a degree - from the wish to acquire social capital. But since there's now a global market to compete with, I'm forced more into the (more detrimental) aquisition of financial capital instead.

I have often thought how much difference it would make to social outcomes of musicians if music could not be recorded or amplified. Performance would be limited to small groups. The same applies to many art forms.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
memmel on August 15, 2008 - 1:04pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

To some extent this issue is not a matter of recording but access to distribution channels. If you think about it the real problem is a performing art needs an audience. The reason I bring this up is obviously there is a imbalance in access to customers between the small time musician that the industry. Internet radio is beginning to close this gap. But the key point is that every time you don't perform we lose the chance for a famous song to be created. So the main point of loosing the chance for human inspiration stands. Only when people are actively involved in a process esp the arts can new art be created. The recording industry destroys a lot of this. Look at Rap and indeed most of our new musical forms they where all developed by street musicians or bar bands.

I've noticed in bars the tendency to have DJ's instead of live music for example.

Back to the interesting problem of high fidelity recording. All I can do is compare it to a computer program programs can be perfectly copied but we have a vibrant open source community so perfect copying works to our advantage. The big difference I see is the with programs we can choose to send the source which allows people to apply their own inspiration to a original work. I'd say that the problem with music in a world where it can be perfectly copied is that you lack a real format for sending music out in a form that allows it to be edited and modified by others.

So what probably needs to happen is that music should actually be send in the form of a electronic notes. Voice removed editable tracks etc. The voice format itself probably needs some sort of word recognition boundary so that its also editable. You can see that I'm suggesting that the problem is music is not being distributed in a form that allows others to perform the work and add their own inspiration. Karaoke is a small example of this and it keeps older songs alive and well.

In general this problem is true for all of the performing arts to overcome the problems of digital reproduction and its destruction of human inspiration they need to follow the open source model and release the ability to perform and edit the work to create new works. Thus the underlying problem is not high fidelity reproduction but having closed the doors to allow works to be adapted.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
andybts on August 15, 2008 - 1:45pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I see what you're getting at, but don't really equate the creation/performance of music with software development (I do both). Maybe it's a personal thing, and although both are creative, I consider software development a logical, rationalised and designed process where there is little room for emotion, whereas music (for me anyway) is an emotional outpouring during which if the rational mind intervenes too much, the music suffers.

I have thought about open source music before though, and it seems like a good idea, although most musicians I've met are quite precious about ownership issues - perhaps that's because they tend to earn less than software developers?

I still think I'd prefer a less globalised music market, on the other hand I'm certainly glad to have had access to such an array of choice and influence... so maybe it's just jealousy!

I suppose employing DJs for entertainment rather than instrumentalists is analogous to employing a man and a plough rather than and army of people with spades. In both cases cheap energy/technology is leveraged, and forms a replacement for people.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
memmel on August 15, 2008 - 3:13pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Its a interesting problem and exposes the flaws of generalizations perfectly. But by using the basic concept of what your trying to achieve which is to inject and distribute your own musical inspirations I think you can frame the problem correctly. As is often the case the biggest problem is identifying the problem once its identified then solutions can be tried. Personally I think the entire music industry is seriously sick sort of like the Software industry which is controlled by a few major players. The open source movement was lucky to succeed. I think the music industry needs the same sort of lucky/stealth change that breaks the strangle hold of the recording studios. Considering the immense wealth offered to successful musicians it not surprising that they are part of the problem. The film/acting industry suffers from similar dynamics.

As we run out of Natural Gas to fire our air conditioners maybe people will return to live music and this will break up the recording cartel.

I dunno all I do know is that on average the poorer communities are far more musical then the wealthy ones.

I do know from my own life that cool music was far more prevalent when I was younger then it is today. Although I don't like rap in general some really good songs where created early on now its been commercialized.

Its interesting that the state of music at any point in time seems to be very reflective of the social and economic conditions. I'm not sure how to interpret this but music somehow acts as sort of a indicator of our social state. Not just rich and poor but also it embodies our happy/sad concepts in a collective way.
Country music for example..

I think we have made a mistake by not really listening to our own music to understand our societies.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
andybts on August 16, 2008 - 5:04am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I think you're right about music reflecting society, but also think music (and art generally) has some emotional power to help change societies to some degree too. At the moment I'll admit there's little evidence of this.

Appealing to peoples emotions has often been useful for leaders in difficult times - sometimes notoriously. If we can harness these powers positively on a more local level - as global/national institutions reduce in significance, it might help provide at least a little help in getting our societies through what is coming.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

178 comments on Geopolitical Disruptions #1: Theory of Disruptions to Oil & Resource Supply

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version