Calling all cultured aspies

Post Reply New Topic

Do you view etiquette as a social necessity rather than a boring social norm that shouldn’t exist? Do you understand that sushi is not meant to be eaten with a fork? Do you try new experiences that are meaningful (art museums, planetariums etc...) and do you know that bowling is NOT the only fun activity in the world? If you answered yes to all of these welcome to the cultured and well rounded aspies thread. Here you can discuss anything from books and literature to ballet and various teas from different countries. Basically you can discuss whatever but nothing you are undereducated about.

I like to think of myself as reasonably cultured, but I can't see how the questions you posted can serve as a litmus test of whether one is cultured, but alive at all. At least, I hope the bar isn't that low.

The only area where I consider myself less than cultured is wine - I can barely tell a merlot from a pinot noir.

I’m a bit hazy on the rules. Who decides what is or isn’t cultured? How would you define “undereducated?” Are we just talking about highbrow white culture? If so, we’d better avoid discussing “The Miller’s Tale” from The Canterbury Tales. ‘Tis a pity...

What makes an experience “meaningful?” Couldn’t some experiences be meaningful to some but not to others?

I love going to see a ballet production and an art museum because I find such activities enjoyable ways to spend my time (art for art’s sake), but I don’t care for elitism, either. Only enjoying highbrow white culture hardly makes a person well-rounded. As far as art goes, should we avoid talking about pieces like Duchamp’s Fountain? I’m rather fond of absurdist art.

Does anybody else enjoy the symphonies of Shostakovich?

This is what I was wondering, too. If we only take the things in the first post in to account then yes, I'm definitely cultured, but somehow I don't think that's enough to define it. That and I don't think etiquette is so black and white; I see some etiquette rules as very necessary, but some others as rather meaningless, not to mention some are even wasteful.

I assume you are the one making the rules about whom/what constitutes "cultured"?

I’m just about the worst bowler in the world. Once I bowled a 42. I should close my eyes the next time I bowl and see if I do any better.

Anyway, bowling can be a meaningful experience. Parents and kids often connect, build a deeper bond, and share some happy memories at such places.

I think we’re going to have to vote on it.

We can’t forget to include the rich beauty of indigenous cultures as well as the vibrant facets of African American culture, especially early jazz, poetry of the early 20th century (Langston Hughes!), and hip hop music and dancing.

I read my comic books without ever moving my lips!
And I hold my pinky finger up when I hold a slice of pizza.

Cant get more cultured than that! ( unless you're a pearl, or a vat of yogurt)!
=================

But seriously... I pretty much answered yes to each of your questions. So I qualify.

I’m more of a sucker for Rachmaninov, especially his piano concertos.



It’s instant goosebumps every time!

Too Romantic, too precious and too self-conscious. There's nothing to find in Rachmaninoff other than quick relief. He doesn't have anything deeper or more serious to say.

Just because you haven’t heard it doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

Musical experiences are highly subjective. If we have different personalities and life experiences, we will probably have different reactions to music, too.

What’s wrong with Romance?

Music, like all art, is a lot more objective than postmodernism would have us believe, but still largely subjective. I wasn't attacking your position, only stating my own, quite largely subjective one.

I can't stand the hero-worship, passion and subjectivism of the Romantics. I think life is a tragedy, and that one must be more pessimistic/realistic than that. There is no deliverance or happiness in this life - only the next one. Maybe I've read too much Schopenhauer, but this is what I've come to believe, and for the most part I'm at peace about it. Shostakovich's pathos is much more convincing in comparison, albeit rather vain and self-indulgent.

My life could be described as a tragedy up until this point, but I still think there is much beauty and sublime experiences to be had in the here and now.

There's a melancholy about beauty and sublimity; they only ever point the way towards happiness, always leaving something further to be discovered. I've come to believe that that ne plus ultra can only be achieved by religious devotion.

There are shreds of happiness to be had here and there, but the balance of pleasure and pain will always favour the latter (for good biological reasons, if nothing else). The greatest happiness comes from devotion to our God on a personal level and, on an interpersonal level, striving not to bring pleasure to others (necessarily), but chiefly to rid them of their pain, which is far more preponderant. In secular terms, you can compare this to Popper's "negative utilitarianism". We must do all this in a spirit of humility and selflessness.

I’ve found greater happiness by adopting atheism but different strokes for different folks.

I enjoy finding my own meaning and purpose instead of one that has been supposedly prescribed for me. I have also enjoyed evolving my own moral code instead of following a set of beliefs that felt, at times, immoral to me.

I try not to overlook the small moments in life that have their own beauty and richness. I try not to take anything for granted.