Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Horatio Parker · 12-07-2012, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

Sorry, my error. Mozart was five years old when he wrote his first composition,
K1a

Ok, she's not Bach, but, I can picture Anna Magdalena, watching this six year old girl.

I can't even play this minuet from the Anna Magdalena Notebooks

Nitpick: Mozart's early works were notated by his father. No one knows if Leopold "helped".

Mozart's brilliance and precocity are unquestioned, but he was not producing his own scores at that age.

James The Least · 12-07-2012, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I went with my son's class to see a production of the Wizard of Oz at the Seattle Children's Theater (Canadian spelling 'Theatre') and a parallel struck me with the gospel as I was watching the show (I've had thoughts about the Bible doing virtually everything). My son told me that the teacher in school informed the class that the ruby slippers were originally silver. That got my memory jogging because I remember reading somewhere - a long time ago - that Frank Baum wrote the narrative as a statement about monetary policy:

Quote:

The Wonderful Wizard of Oz by L. Frank Baum (Chicago, 1900) is a parable about Money Reform and the 1890s Midwestern political movement led by William Jennings Bryan (1860-1925); three times candidate for President of the United States (see his poster at bottom of this page). From 1891-1895 Bryan served in the House of Representatives, where he advocated the coinage of silver at a fixed ratio with gold, in order to break the bankers’ monopoly and manipulation of the gold-backed currency.

Bryan and his supporters accused Eastern banks and railroads of oppressing farmers and industrial workers. Bryan believed that a switch to silver-backed currency would make money plentiful. Although correct, Money Reformers today would argue that money need not, and should not, be backed by either silver or gold, but only by the people, their skills, and their resources.

In 1896 Bryan delivered the following words at the Democratic National Convention: “Having behind us the producing masses of this nation and the world, supported by the commercial interests, the labouring interests, and the toilers everywhere, we will answer their [i.e. the bankers'] demand for a gold standard by saying to them: ‘You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns; you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.’”

Although only 36 years old, this speech resulted in his nomination for the presidency. He contested, and lost to, William McKinley. He stood again for the Democrats in 1900 and 1908, losing both times.

Carroll Quigley wrote about the 1896 Presidential election in Tragedy and Hope: A History of The World in Our Time (MacMillan, 1966, p. 74): “Though the forces of high finance and of big business were in a state of near panic, by a mighty effort involving large-scale spending they were successful in electing McKinley.”

L. Frank Baum was editor of a South Dakota newspaper and he wrote the first of his Oz series on Bryan’s second attempt in 1900.

Oz is short for ounce, the measure for gold and silver.

Dorothy, hailing from Kansas, represents the commoner.

The Tin Woodsman is the industrial worker, rusted as solid as the factories shut down in the 1893 depression. The Scarecrow is the farmer who apparently doesn’t have the wit to understand his situation or his political interests. The Cowardly Lion is Bryan himself; who had a loud roar but little political power.

The Good Witches represent the magical potential of the people of the North and the South.

After vanquishing the Wicked Witch of the East (the Eastern bankers) Dorothy frees The Munchkins (the little people). With the witch’s silver slippers (the silver standard), Dorothy sets out on the Yellow Brick Road (the gold standard) to the Emerald City (Washington), where they meet the Wizard (the President), who appears powerful, but is ultimately revealed as an illusion; the real Wizard being just a little man who pulls levers behind a curtain.

This can be interpreted in two ways: Either, the President himself is really just a little man who pulls levers to sustain an illusion of power, or, the real power of the President rests with the little men behind the curtains who pull the levers and create the illusion.

When the real Wizard is exposed, the now enlightened Scarecrow denounces him. Dorothy drowns the Wicked Witch of the West (the West Coast elite); the water being an allegory for the Midwest drought. The real Wizard flies away in a hot-air balloon, the Scarecrow is left to govern the Emerald City, the Tin Woodsman rules the West, and the Cowardly Lion returns to the forest where he becomes King of the Beasts after vanquishing a giant spider which was devouring the animals in the forest. Dorothy’s silver slippers were changed to ruby in the 1939 film http://prosperityuk.com/2001/01/a-wo...eform-parable/

The point here is that at one time the book must have been readily understood as an allegory for something that a large segment of the population readily understood as symbolic but then as time went on the story was shortened and altered to read like a straightforward narrative. This is critical in understanding the gospel especially when you have a large population in Alexandria which understood that the story was an allegory for something 'mystical' or 'symbolic.'

In time of course the Jesus story became a more or less straightforward narrative - basically one dimensional - about 'stuff' Jesus did. There is still some sense that we are going to be 'saved' through the gospel. But the details of the story have been lost or changed so as to make it possible to understand the original allegory. I think there are important parallels here worth considering.

When I would make reference to the actual context of the original story the parents there would be like 'yeah, that's interesting (not).' You know polite but not interested in taking the story in any other way than they were led to believe as naive little children. I guess my point is that those who claim that allegories only come after a two dimensional narrative is established (= the neo-Platonic model for understanding Homer) isn't always true. Sometimes the idiots bring a symbolic story down to the level of their own intellectual capabilities. In this case 'it's just about a little girl trying to get home to Kansas.' No it is not. No it is not. And neither is the gospel.

Maybe the lesson is that it is children who ruin everything. I mean you can't listen to Vince Guaraldi without thinking of a walking beagle. Nietzsche's Superman without imagining a man flying in a cape. Maybe sacred or important things should be kept away from kids. I am seriously considering that infant baptism destroyed or transformed Christianity. It was those ancients in the third century who had been been brought up as Christians who took the nonsensically two-dimensional stories told to them as lullabies as 'all there was' to the gospel. I think Celsus says this somewhere. But its true. When adults joined the faith generations earlier they were brought in by the allegory, much like the original readers of Frank Baum.

Sounds to me like this writer is simply rationalizing a myth; in this case the "myth" being a typical children's story with fantastic characters.

Maybe the real lesson here is that sometimes children's books are simply children's books. And perhaps gospels are simply gospels, but the Christians were the ones who insisted on rationalizing a myth.

aa5874 · 12-07-2012, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

...The reason we see contradictions in the early synoptics is because they didnt view it literally and there was no conspiracy to create anything. Early on it was all allegory to rememeber a important figure in their lives and pass on morals and other lessons in life.

Your claims are completely unsubstantiated. You have ZERO actual dated manuscripts from the 1st century.

You are an inventor of your own history.

steve_bnk · 12-07-2012, 11:21 PM

Dorothy was the girl Baum had a crush on as a kid. Unrequited love.

The wicked witch is Baum's mother in law.

The scarecrow is his half witted brother in law.

The wizard was Baums father who he realized was not god.

And so on and so forth.

Sheshbazzar · 12-07-2012, 11:35 PM

Whatever, it is not a historical account of a girl from Kansas and her dog that got transported to the Land of Oz by a tornado.
No more than the NT is a historical account of a man from Israel that got raised from the dead and levitated into the heavens to sit on The Great and Terrible Oz ...er...Yahweh's... right hand. (must be getting a bit uncomfortable fer both of um after all this time. No wonder they'll be so pissed.)

outhouse · 12-08-2012, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Whatever, it is not a historical account of a girl from Kansas and her dog that got transported to the Land of Oz by a tornado.
No more than the NT is a historical account of a man from Israel that got raised from the dead and levitated into the heavens to sit on The Great and Terrible Oz ...er...Yahweh's... right hand. (must be getting a bit uncomfortable fer both of um after all this time. No wonder they'll be so pissed.)

Its two different methods that have no buisiness being compared.

One is straight up fiction.

The other theology written with mythology.

This is like comparing hotdogs to pumpkins.

Sheshbazzar · 12-08-2012, 01:38 PM

Theology written with mythology is not history. It certainly is not a hotdog, nor is it a pumpkin.

And thus it is comparable to .....what? And to what may it be equated?

I find it to be comparable to that two word item I have so often written in this Forum in response to Adam's claims.

outhouse · 12-08-2012, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Theology written with mythology is not history. It certainly is not a hotdog, nor is it a pumpkin.

And thus it is comparable to .....what? And to what may it be equated?

I find it to be comparable to that two word item I have so often written in this Forum in response to Adam's claims.

Who mentioned history? :huh:

You dont love a good metaphor LOL

sharrock · 12-10-2012, 12:13 PM

Continuing the wacky discourse... I mentioned this article to a colleague and they promptly told me about a link to an album by Pink Floyd...

http://voices.yahoo.com/the-wizard-o...e-2690974.html

:constern01:

stephan huller · 12-10-2012, 06:27 PM

Another coincidence. The article about a film which has a character named Toto appears in this forum where there is a moderator named Toto while I am sitting beside by child (= toto in Kiswahili). Must have a deeper meaning. I would have added 'listening to a band called Toto' but I hate Toto (although I have to concede that Steve Lukather is a talented guitar player).

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-07-2012, 11:21 PM	#34
steve_bnk Contributor Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,602	Dorothy was the girl Baum had a crush on as a kid. Unrequited love. The wicked witch is Baum's mother in law. The scarecrow is his half witted brother in law. The wizard was Baums father who he realized was not god. And so on and so forth.

12-07-2012, 11:35 PM	#35
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Whatever, it is not a historical account of a girl from Kansas and her dog that got transported to the Land of Oz by a tornado. No more than the NT is a historical account of a man from Israel that got raised from the dead and levitated into the heavens to sit on The Great and Terrible Oz ...er...Yahweh's... right hand. (must be getting a bit uncomfortable fer both of um after all this time. No wonder they'll be so pissed.)

12-08-2012, 01:38 PM	#37
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Theology written with mythology is not history. It certainly is not a hotdog, nor is it a pumpkin. And thus it is comparable to .....what? And to what may it be equated? I find it to be comparable to that two word item I have so often written in this Forum in response to Adam's claims.

12-10-2012, 12:13 PM	#39
sharrock Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: UK Posts: 80	Continuing the wacky discourse... I mentioned this article to a colleague and they promptly told me about a link to an album by Pink Floyd... http://voices.yahoo.com/the-wizard-o...e-2690974.html :constern01:

12-10-2012, 06:27 PM	#40
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Another coincidence. The article about a film which has a character named Toto appears in this forum where there is a moderator named Toto while I am sitting beside by child (= toto in Kiswahili). Must have a deeper meaning. I would have added 'listening to a band called Toto' but I hate Toto (although I have to concede that Steve Lukather is a talented guitar player).

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.