Gauracandra

Hey, eh, I didn't know you were a poet you hoser, or did you just hork that poem from someone else eh? Gauracandra

I may not be understanding exactly what is being asked. Does this mean that everything will be backwards and upside down? Like have the newest threads at the top, and the original posting at the bottom? If so, personally I don't think I would like that. I like to go in a logical order when reading the postings of others. Going backwards just seems odd to me. Gauracandra

I was just reading "Sadhu-sanga: The Birthplace of Bhakti" by Srila Gour Govinda Swami, and wanted to quote a small section: I wanted to quote this because although these forums are great, and the internet can bring us together to discuss many things "theoretically" it is the practical association of devotees that is necessary. We should not just sit in our darkened rooms with the glare of the computer on our face. Rather we should move beyond theoretical talk, and actively associate with those seeking spiritual advancement. Otherwise what we say are only words, and nothing else. Gauracandra

Maitreya, I also saw that anti-Catholic message in the movie as well. Especially the blatant part where Gigolo Joe says many of his clients come from Our Mother of Mary of the Sacred Heart (or whatever that place was called). Anyways, here are some of my ramblings about the movie. Ramblings about the movie A.I. Just got back from the theater and figured I’d give you my first impressions. There may (or may not) be spoilers in this posting, so read on with that in mind. My initial impression is that the movie is somewhere between passable sci-fi and TOTAL, UNDENIABLE PRETENTIOUS CRAP!!!!! The beginning is slow and ponderous. But I can forgive that since it is trying to setup the rest of the movie. The middle section is quite good except for two parts (a voice cameo by comedian Chris Rock, and an Einstein Hologram voiced by Robin Williams, both of which are distracting), but then the ending is terrible. I mean really, Really, NO I MEAN REALLY BAD. The story was written by Stephen Spielberg based off of a short story (which I read a few years ago, its quite good) by Brian Aldiss called “Super Toys Last All Summer Long”, as well as reportedly thousands of pages of notes, sketches, faxes, emails etc….. between the late Stanley Kubrick (2001: A Space Odyssey, Eyes Wide Shut) and Stephen Spielberg (E.T., Schindler’s List). Now with two of the worlds best film makers you’d expect some world class movie making. But what you get instead is a jumbled, at times almost incoherent movie. I’ve followed this film’s development for a few years now. Here is a brief synopsis of what was the vision for the film. Essentially Kubrick wanted people to fall in love with a fairy tale about the future of mankind. In 2001: A Space Odyssey, Kubrick tried to show man’s evolution from animal, to man, to sentient machine, to a “star child”. Now many decried that as being pretentious pablum as well, but it went well with the psychedelic 60s. In this, Kubrick wanted to tell a fairy tale about a robot boy and his search for love, spanning several thousand years, with man’s eventual extinction, but reemergence as a higher life form beyond A.I. Here is my problem with the ending. There is a saying that less is more - and this fits perfectly with this movie. Most people, because they don’t know the background of this movie, have no idea what is going on. Basically you see these really tall, skinny alien looking creatures at the end rediscover the A.I. child. These are supposed to be the evolved humans. But we don’t know that by watching the movie. They look like cheesy aliens. And then worst of all they speak and we get subtitles at the bottom of the screen. Then they latter talk with a British accent. Its B-movie style badness. Its somewhat the same problem with the ending to Contact. The ending of Contact was alright, but by trying to show the unimaginable, they end up making it seem hokey. The aliens, the setup, it all seems cheesy. Besides these evolved A.I. don’t have a particularly creative design. Many sci-fi movies have used this look before. Another problem with the movie is that it keeps hammering away to let us know that this is a remake of Pinocchio. I mean there are probably like 20-30 times in this movie where they say “But Pinocchio can be made a real boy” “I want the Blue Fairy to make me into a real boy like she did Pinocchio” etc….. Its sooooooooooooooooooo obvious, that you figure the director thought we were all imbeciles. The way movie magic works best, just like real magic, is to plant an idea in the mind of the audience, and then let their imagination do all the work for you. Don’t keep telling us over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over…. Ok my fingers are getting tired so I’ll stop with the overs…… again about what this movie is supposed to be about. The best part was the middle section. It had an odd atmosphere and was visually interesting. The two stand outs are Teddy and Gigolo Joe (played by Jude Law). They were both lots of fun. Haley Joel Osment (the kid from the Sixth Sense) was ok, but his character wasn’t real lovable, despite the fact that this movie was trying to get us to fall in love with him. I can nitpick this movie to bits with plot holes and inconsistencies but why bother. There is a point where if this movie had ended I could have given it a passing score. It would have been a melancholy ending but much better than what we got instead. Overall I’d give the beginning a C-, the Middle a B, and the ending an F- so it probably ends up being a D+ or so. Gauracandra [This message has been edited by Gauracandra (edited 06-30-2001).]

I'll be seeing this tomorrow and will write up some sort of review. In the meantime, this comes from Time magazine.

Prabhu, Is there a reason I get an error message when I click on them? I was so excited to be able to hear those great kirtans again. But now it wont play Gauracandra

I also wanted to mention Bahudak Prabhu as being, in my opinion, one of the best kirtaneers out there. Great voice and great musician. He could do soothing or energetic. Just reminicing on old times. Gauracandra

Just wanted to give a thumbs up as well to Bharadraj's singing. Gauracandra

1. Ahhh- I see the $%^&-up fairy has visited us again…. 2. I don’t know what your problem is, but I’ll bet its hard to pronounce. 3. How about never? Is never good for you? 4. I see you’ve set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in public. 5. I’m really easy to get along with once you people learn to worship me. 6. I’ll try being nicer if you’ll try being smarter. 7. I’m out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message…. 8. I don’t work here. I’m a consultant. 9. It sounds like English, but I can’t understand a word you’re saying. 10. I can see your point, but I still think you’re full of #@*& 11. I like you. You remind me of when I was young and stupid. 12. You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers. 13. I have plenty of talent and vision. I just don’t give a damn. 14. I’m already visualizing the duct tape over your mouth. 15. I will always cherish the initial misconceptions I had about you. 16. Thank you. We’re all refreshed and challenged by your unique point of view. 17. The fact that no one understands you doesn’t mean you’re an artist. 18. Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental. 19. What am I? Flypaper for freaks!? 20. I’m not being rude. You’re just insignificant. 21. It’s a thankless job, but I’ve got a lot of karma to burn off. 22. Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial. 23. No, my powers can only be used for good. 24. You sound reasonable… Time to up the medication. 25. Who me? I just wander from room to room. 26. Any your crybaby whiney-butt opinion would be…? 27. Do I look like a people person? 28. This isn’t an office. It’s Hell with fluorescent lighting. 29. I started out with nothing & still have most of it left. 30. You know, it takes 32 muscles to smile, but only 4 to flip you off! 31. You!…Off my planet! 32. Does your train of though have a caboose? 33. Errors have been made. Others will be blamed. 34. A PBS mind in an MTV world. 35. Allow me to introduce my selves. 36. Whatever kind of look you were going for, you missed it. 37. CAPTAIN! SHE CANNA TAKAH ANYMOORE!! 38. I’m trying to imagine you with a personality. 39. A cubicle is just a padded cell without a door. 40. Stress is when you wake up screaming & you realize you haven’t fallen asleep yet. 41. Can I trade this job for what’s behind door number 1? 42. Too many freaks, not enough circuses. 43. Nice perfume. Must you marinate in it? 44. Chaos, panic, & disorder – my work here is done. 45. How do I set a laser printer to stun? 46. I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted the paychecks. 47. If I throw a stick, will you leave? 48. Sarcasm is just one more service we offer.

You know, I might be wrong, but I'm almost positive that www.hinduism.org once belonged to the magazine Hinduism Today. They must have slipped up one day and let the name expire. If I'm right, and they did let it expire, it would say something about their management (heads better have rolled). So then this guy jumped in and bought it for $20 and is using it to attack. Kind of sad, but thats the nature of the world today. Gauracandra

Let me be very clear - I love the diversity of this movement. So many different people, who ordinarily would never come together. The only thing that holds them together is the Holy Name. I am not suggesting that we cut membership etc... But a homogeneous group of people can relate to one another better. I came to this conclusion by trying to determine what factors are necessary for a religion to grow and flourish. One key factor is for the members to become a 'people'. What does that mean? It means to have a common connection to one another, a sense of history and destiny. Not a bunch of disparate individuals, each with their own plans, doing their own thing. Diversity can be useful in one sense. In my opinion, the sheer diversity in India is what prevented it from ever being destroyed and vanquished by the British, the Muslims, Christians etc.... Look at how many culture in the world have been wiped off the face of the earth. But not India. Its still there. Why? Because there was no one head to cut off for the body to die. But at the same time, it is my thesis that one of the reasons that Europe prospered economically (for instance) is because they created a common religion - Christianity - that united a broad geographic group. Thus they were able to move forward economically, socially, religiously. In India today you have people who want a country for Sikhs, for Tamils, for Gujaratis etc.... Everyone has their own caste, their own language etc.... What Caitanya Mahaprabhu decided to do was give a common platform by which all these people could relate to one another - that being the Holy Name. I look at the diversity at my temple and marvel at how many different people there are. Its great. I love it. The only unifying principle is the Holy Name and the power of Prasadam But on a day to day basis, for management, for relating to one another outside of the temple kirtan, most of us have nothing in common. A homogeneous group is capable of creating a sense of peopleness. A sense of shared destiny. With that, then such people can relate much better to one another. Gauracandra

My only concern was that this was turning into name calling like 'faggot' etc.... If one wants to discuss philosophically thats something entirely different. Gauracandra

A big part of the answer to your question is: Diversity is a weakness. I have been doing my own research into other religious traditions to find out what factors tend to make a religion successful. One of the key factors is developing a sense of ‘peopleness’. How do people relate to one another? People relate because they have a common cultural background, have common approaches to the world, have common interests in general, have common ways of speaking and acting, have common notions of what is right or wrong, have common ideas of what is important etc… The most successful religions are those that are as homogeneous as possible (at least early on). Everyone knows what they can expect from one another and how to approach each other whether it be in anger or in love. Now fast forward to the Hare Krsnas. In my opinion, we are one of the if not THE most diverse religious group. I’ve made a posting in the past explaining the diversity at my temple, and I’ve seen the same thing at other temples I’ve frequented. Next time you are at the temple find two people and ask yourself a simple question “What do these people have in common that they are both devotees?” I’ve done this and almost never can come up with an answer beyond they love the deities, kirtan, and prasadam Beyond that most people have nothing in common for them to relate to outside of the temple environment. We’ve got different races, ages, economic backgrounds, cultures, ideas for doing things etc…. If you wanted to make interpersonal relationships work out better then the best thing for the Hare Krsnas to do is to start cutting back on its membership. There are some groups that only focus in on certain niches – like teaching yoga to suburban housewives with family incomes of $100,000 per year. A nice clean homogenous group. Get rid of all the chunks and differences. Blend it up, homogenize it, pasteurize it, run it through a sieve a few times. Once a group loses its diversity it becomes much easier to relate one to another. We’ll all be the same. We’ll all have the same ideas of how to do things, the same background, the same income levels, the same approaches to anger and love. Diversity is a weakness – but homogeneity is really, REALLY boring. Gauracandra

Indradyumna Swami held kirtan at my temple a few years back and did a real nice job. One devotee in the back used an electric guitar as a sort of background humming. It was really mellow and beautiful kirtan. Also, I've been to kirtans by disciples of Narayan Maharaj, and they have been very nice. As for songs, there is only one that really gets my hair to stand up on end. Its Mother Yamuna's singing of the Govindam prayers. Have you ever just sat there and listened to it? Its almost alien, very ethereal sounding. Its so beautiful, simple, and different. Gauracandra

Yes, lets not turn this into a gay bashing thread. No good will come of such discussion. Gauracandra

Our current city structure is based on an outdated model. In the past it was necessary to have a central location for the efficient and timely transportation of information and goods. Railroads brought goods to a central location for later transportation across other channels. Cities developed, and even within cities downtown areas developed. But with the 1950s came change. Now there were roads and cars. Now people could live in the suburbs, buy cheap land and build nice homes. So they moved out of the cities and commuted to downtown for the jobs. This created a hollow city structure devoid of a solid tax base as the middle class fled the cities for the safe suburbs. And so we saw a spiral downwards in many of our cities with the poor left behind. A good tax base was no longer available to pay for quality education in our inner cities. In the past a rich man’s son might go to the same public school as a poor man’s son. Now the poor were left behind. And to a certain extent you really couldn’t blame those who left the cities. Rent was high, the quality of life not nearly as good as the suburbs. As some left it created an avalanche that encouraged others to get out as well. Now we live in an information age. Goods can be moved very easily at inexpensive cost. Why do we even need a downtown area? It exists now simply due to momentum from the past. Banks no longer need to congregate in a “financial district”. They send their information across electronically. I think the idea of cities as we know them will change radically. We may not even have downtown areas. An electronic environment will allow people to telecommute. Other jobs could be spread out around the city creating a more even distribution of jobs and helping out traffic. Right now everyone goes downtown every morning to work. Why? Because that’s where the jobs are. So traffic is terrible. Why not have those same jobs spread all around the city. I think a design for a future city should take this into consideration. I liked your idea, Maitreya, about a circular city linked by a monorail. Suppose people lived in the interior of the circle, and instead of having a centralized downtown, the outer circle had all the jobs. Evenly distributed around the circle. It would make for a better traffic flow, and create a more even distribution of jobs for the residents. Just one idea. Gauracandra

Just wanted to make one other point. This deals with formalized kirtan. For me personally, I tend not to like the formalized professional kirtaneers. Atleast the ones I've heard. They seem to be working too hard at pulling at the emotions, but for me tend to come off as very hollow. Atleast the one's I've heard. If you want to hear some great kirtan check out a recording on this site by Srila Gour Govinda Swami. I believe it is Jaya Gopala in the Audio section. What I like about Srila Gour Govinda Swami's singing, is that sometimes the beats are off, or he is shouting practically etc... but it is so much fun to listen to. Nothing formalized, and not immature. Just great kirtan. Gauracandra

I can see what you mean. Often times I see a certain immaturity among some devotees during kirtan. Too often they are trying to attract attention to themselves through their dancing, or singing. I think you can tell the spiritual maturity of devotees simply by watching them in kirtan. Not all are like that, actually most aren't, but still there is a somewhat large percentage. I remember a few months ago, an old Prabhupada disciple led kirtan in my temple. He's a rtvik (not that that matters) but his kirtan was very moving. Very old tunes. Nothing fancy. Just the prayers to Srila Prabhupada, Hare Krsna, Pancha-tattva prayers etc.... But at certain points I almost started to cry. Partly this was due to the old sounding, simplicity of his kirtan. A bit of nostalgia. There is a difference between maturity in kirtan and formalism. Just as there is a difference between immaturity and spontaneous devotion. Gauracandra

With such a situation, I could see homosexuality on the rise. With it would come an increase in Aids. But still there would be competition for women. So Aids would spread further as well. Could be a real problem. Gauracandra

Semantics

Semantics

Yeah, amanpeter, I like MC's observation as well. Whats scary is that here in the U.S. abortion has really skyrocketed in the last 40 years. Today one in 3 pregnancies ends in abortion. Of the remaining births, another 1/3rd are out of wedlock. The basis for any civilization is the family unit. This rampant promiscuity and abortion mentality is one of the key drivers of deterioration in the U.S. society. It must be remembered that culture is the key to a strong society. Culture is what creates good education, economic development, low crime etc.... But as soon as our culture weakens, it doesn't matter how much money you throw at the problem (say education for instance), you won't solve it. Gauracandra

This is going to have serious social implications in the years to come. Women are the basis of civilization. I don't know how this will affect the culture, but with more men than women, the ability to find a suitable mate for a man will become increasingly harder. What this will do to the societal fabric is hard to say. Gauracandra

Francis Ford Coppola is considering writing and directing a movie with this scenario - what if scientists and artists came together to design a city. Its tentatively called "Megatropolis". Anyways, yesterday I was watching The Learning Channel (or perhaps Discover, or A&E, I can't remember) and they had a quick 5 minute section on Brasilia. I had never heard of this before. I guess in the 1960s, the President of Brazil decided to build a city from scratch in the heart of Brazil. His plan eventually came to fruition, but nearly bankrupted the country. It was designed for 1/2 million people, but today has about 2 million residents, many of whom are poor living on the outskirts. I'd be interested if any of you have info. on this city's history. Also, just for fun, if you were to build a city how would you design it. In Utah, the Mormons designed Salt Lake City around their first temple. Every street radiates out from the temple as the center. So your street address would be like 1000 North Temple or such. What design elements would you incorporate? Its pure imagination. I'll think up a few ideas, but just for fun, maybe suggest some. Gauracandra

I copied this from CNN.com. Its the cover article for Time magazine. I don't quite see why this is news, or the cover of Time, since this theory has been around for years. Nothing new as far as I can see. But if you want an interesting read check it out. By the way, its loooooooooooooong