The very many questions-not-worth-their-own-thread question thread XXV

[Mouthwash]

Borachio. Never leave me.

 

[sophie]

It has religious significance.



It has religious significance.



People want to be able to see themselves represented in a different medium.



Landscapes are beautiful because they reflect real life or imagined places. We evolved to find aesthetic value in such scenery, and to invent our own.

Well, abstraction in art exists because the artists felt that doing the same thing the same way that everybody else had been doing it for the better part of 6 centuries was boring. Why does art need to be aesthetic? Why does it need to be representational or conform to preconceived, academically mandated tenets? The answer is it doesn't and artists spent the better part of 6 or 7 decades, from Matisse and Picasso and Kirchner to Mondrian and Picabia and Höch and Grosz to Rothko and Pollock and Newman to Warhol and Lichtenstein and Rauschenburg arguing this point.

It's the same question as why a song has to be melodic, or why it has to conform to the vcvc(c) structure, or why it needs to have an x/4 rhythm. The same question as why a film needs to have a plot, why a story needs to be told sequentially, why a video game needs to have good graphics, or be "immersive" or have fun gameplay.

Modern art (and I mean the entirety of it, from modernist music to modernist architecture to modernist literature, to, yes, modernist painting and sculpture) was all about questioning convention, breaking rules, redefining what art was and why it was valuable, and pushing the envelope of what was possible within a specific medium (if even that medium had defined boundaries: f.e. Picasso's collage work and Duchamp's ready-mades)

 

[Farm Boy]

Link to video.

 

[Borachio]

Borachio. Never leave me.

Wut?

Anyway, that was a Rothko, was it?

I never knew. I have heard of Rothko. That's coz he's got reputation, see?

Screaming Pope Francis Bacon.

(No. Not that Francis Bacon. The other one.)

 

[Mouthwash]

Zbigniew Brzezinski tweeted a while back "If Snowden is a "patriotic freedom lover," why did he choose PRC territory for his revelations?" What does PRC stand for? I've googled it and I can't find anything that makes sense in context.

 

[Camikaze]

People's Republic of China, presumably. Not that it renders the quote any more sensible.

 

[Mouthwash]

People's Republic of China, presumably. Not that it renders the quote any more sensible.

I know, that's what I got.

 

[dutchfire]

He was in Hong Kong during the first revelations.

 

[PlutonianEmpire]

So, the news won't stop blabbering about the drought in the US; especially Californicationia. Is it likely we're about to begin another "dustbowl" type of drought spanning a full decade or two?

 

[SouthernKing]

Is there any way for me, as an American, to stream the BBC's or <Australian channel>'s broadcasting of the Sochi Olympics? Because I rather strongly dislike NBC's coverage.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

So, the news won't stop blabbering about the drought in the US; especially Californicationia. Is it likely we're about to begin another "dustbowl" type of drought spanning a full decade or two?

Doubtful. Back then we had little understanding of what caused it (beyond drought) and took no actions to stop it until it was well underway. Remember that a principle cause was human mismanagement of the land. While we can't make it rain, we can control our own misuse of the land and I find it doubtful we would let that aspect get back to where we were in the 30's.

 

[sophie]

So, the news won't stop blabbering about the drought in the US; especially Californicationia. Is it likely we're about to begin another "dustbowl" type of drought spanning a full decade or two?

That's probably because the drought over here is really really really REALLY bad.

Like really bad.

 

[Farm Boy]

It's unlikely that farmers will till the bejeesus out of overly dry soil causing an actual dust bowl mark ii. It is more likely that residential, industrial, and agricultural demands will exhaust accessible water supplies and ground will be fallowed for Ag and pipes will be built for cities to reroute water from somewhere else.

Edit: *fallowed* I hate the autocorrect on the wife's tablet

 

[sophie]

It's unlikely that farmers will till the bejeesus out of overly dry soil causing a actual eusbowl mark ii. It is more likely that residential, industrial, and agricultural demands will exhaust accessible water supplies and ground will be followed for Ag and pipes will be built for cities to reroute water from somewhere else.

We're getting pretty damn close to mandated water rationing, particularly in areas where the water table is already stressed such as in Santa Cruz.

Cherries are blossoming early out here - expect cherries to be more expensive this year.

The main regions from which our country draws water are putting a total stop on water sale and transport. This is not good for the Santa Clara Valley and the bay in general.

 

[Farm Boy]

Pipes take a while to build.

 

[PlutonianEmpire]

Doubtful. Back then we had little understanding of what caused it (beyond drought) and took no actions to stop it until it was well underway. Remember that a principle cause was human mismanagement of the land. While we can't make it rain, we can control our own misuse of the land and I find it doubtful we would let that aspect get back to where we were in the 30's.

True, but us humans do tend to have short memories.

 

[bhsup]

I know I am an American and we all suck at geography, but doesn't California have at the very least a modest coastline? I'm thinking (sure it is expensive as hell, but you people chose to live where there is no water) a massive desalination project all up and down the coast.

 

[Borachio]

Probably cheaper to pipe it from the Rockies (or wherever the nearest high ground is *waves hands vaguely in direction of America*) than build desalination plants?

 

[bhsup]

Yeah sure, but then that drains those folks' water supply for Californians a thousand miles away.

 

[Cutlass]

NO WATER FOR YOU!

SAN FRANCISCO - Amid California's drought, state officials have announced they won't be able to provide water to agencies serving 25 million people and nearly 1 million acres of farmland.

Friday's announcement marks the first time in the 54-year history of the State Water Project that such action has been taken.

State Department of Water Resources Director Mark Cowin says there simply is not enough water in the system now. He says the action was taken to conserve water in the state's reservoirs, which are far below normal levels.

http://www.10news.com/news/californ...available-to-agencies-serving-millions-013114