Want to know the real motivation of Presidential assassins?

[Senex]

Purchase Stephen Sondheim's Assassins.

A musical theatre piece blows it wide open. Listen and learn.

[theprestige]

Purchase Stephen Sondheim's Assassins.

A musical theatre piece blows it wide open. Listen and learn.
What is it about Sondheim's artwork that commends itself to us as an authoritative analysis of such a topic?

[Dr Adequate]

What is it about Sondheim's artwork that commends itself to us as an authoritative analysis of such a topic? How many other sociopolitical analyses have tunes you can hum?

[pipelineaudio]

How many other sociopolitical analyses have tunes you can hum?

Entire genres of them

[Damien Evans]

How many other sociopolitical analyses have tunes you can hum?

Does Operation: Mindcrime count?

[dafydd]

How many other sociopolitical analyses have tunes you can hum?

The Beggar's Opera comes to mind.

[quadraginta]

How many other sociopolitical analyses have tunes you can hum?


The Wizard Of Oz

West Side Story

The King And I

My Fair Lady

(For bonus points: What do the last three have in common?)

Marni Nixon

[Senex]

No bulloney. Every song explains the motivation of the assassin to the best of skeptical knowledge. Deconstruct a single flaw. I dare you.

[theprestige]

No bulloney. Every song explains the motivation of the assassin to the best of skeptical knowledge. Deconstruct a single flaw. I dare you.
I'll deconstruct two flaws.

First, you're making an appeal to authority, without doing anything to estalibsh that the person you're appealing to is actually an authority on the subject. "He made sense to me" does not establish Sondheim's authority, unless you are also claiming that you yourself are an authority on assassin motivations (in which case you'll need to establish your own authority, before you can appeal to it).

Second, you're shifting the burden of proof. It's your claim, it's your proof. It's not up to me to run around looking for things to deconstruct. It's up to you to present evidence that supports your construction. For example, instead of simply repeating your claim that Sondheim makes a strong case, you could actually present his case. Show us some excerpts of his song lyrics. Explain what you mean by "the best of skeptical knowledge", and point out where in those lyrics you think that standard is met. Then we'd have something to talk about. Then you'd have a claim worth considering.

[Senex]

I'll deconstruct two flaws.

And I'll deconstruct the story of your life.

Accept a dare or don't. Pointing out the flaws in a dare only points out why you have less sex than you might have had if you only had a different attitude.

Don't blame the messenger :rolleyes:

[Praktik]

Wait I thought Coulter already solved this one, wasn't it the poisonous tentacles of left-wing ideology that motivated all Presidential assassins??

[Senex]

Wait I thought Coulter already solved this one, wasn't it the poisonous tentacles of left-wing ideology that motivated all Presidential assassins??

hehehe... you are showing your bias. Just because a woman is pretty, blond, long-legged, given to wearing short skirts, is in need of a good spanking, wears short skirts on TV, behaves naughty, has yellow hair...

...doesn't mean you can attribute whatever you wish to her :D

[theprestige]

And I'll deconstruct the story of your life.
I'd have to tell you the story of my life, first.

Tell you what: You tell me whatever it was that you found in Sondheim's lyrics that was so insightful, and I'll give deconstructing it my best shot. Does that sound fair?

[Praktik]

hehehe... you are showing your bias. Just because a woman is pretty, blond, long-legged, given to wearing short skirts, is in need of a good spanking, wears short skirts on TV, behaves naughty, has yellow hair...

...doesn't mean you can attribute whatever you wish to her :D

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=5245247

[Fnord]

No ... Paul Simon solved this conundrum when he penned, "... the words of the prophets are written on the subway walls and tenement halls ..."
(This is a completely bogus post, added to see if anyone else thinks it as absurd as the OP.)
Just read all the urban grafitti you can find, then draw your own conclusions, and see if you don't agree.

[Senex]

I'd have to tell you the story of my life, first.
Unlike the rascals I quote below, I don't need to hear the whole sordid story before judging ;)

Tell you what: You tell me whatever it was that you found in Sondheim's lyrics that was so insightful, and I'll give deconstructing it my best shot. Does that sound fair?
Not really. I can't legally post all his lyrics and even if I could/did they would be out of context with the brilliant show they belong to. You will just have to see the show before judging.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=5245247
Oh yeah? Well.... http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=90402&page=5
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/Senex/gun.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/Senex/ann_coulter.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/Senex/silver-dress.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/Senex/Annhotttt.jpg

Who do you think you are talking to?

No ... Paul Simon solved this conundrum when he penned, "... the words of the prophets are written on the subway walls and tenement halls ..."
(This is a completely bogus post, added to see if anyone else thinks it as absurd as the OP.)
Just read all the urban grafitti you can find, then draw your own conclusions, and see if you don't agree.
Yes, Sondheim's lyrics equate with graffitti. You equate with woo. You woo.

[quadraginta]

No ... Paul Simon solved this conundrum when he penned, "... the words of the prophets are written on the subway walls and tenement halls ..."
(This is a completely bogus post, added to see if anyone else thinks it as absurd as the OP.)
Just read all the urban grafitti you can find, then draw your own conclusions, and see if you don't agree.

<snip>


Yes, Sondheim's lyrics equate with graffitti. You equate with woo. You woo.


Is this an example of not "reading between the lines"?

[jmcvann]

I can't legally post all his lyrics...

Not that anybody asked for all of them, but is this true? I can't write: I heard this great song. The lyrics say:

We all came out to Montreux on the Lake Geneva shoreline
To make records with a mobile - We didn't have much time
Frank Zappa & the Mothers were at the best place around
But some stupid with a flare gun burned the place to the ground

Smoke on the water - A fire in the sky
Smoke on the water

They burned down the gambling house - It died with an awful sound
Funky & Claude was running in and out, pulling kids out of the ground
When it all was over, we had to find another place
Swiss time was running out - It seemed that we would lose the race

Smoke on the water - A fire in the sky
Smoke on the water

We ended up at the Grand Hotel - It was empty, cold and bare
But with the Rolling Truck Stones Thing just outside making our music there
With a few red lights an' a few old beds, we made a place to sweat
No matter what we get out of this, I know... I know we'll never forget

Smoke on the water - A fire in the sky
Smoke on the water

Did I just break the law?

[Praktik]

Who do you think you are talking to?

I have no idea, probably someone who rubbed a few out at the altar of Coulter..;)

But if by this comment you mean you were aware she made her preposterous claim, then your earlier post asserting that I had invented this claim of hers out of whole cloth is even more mystifying!

[Senex]

Is this an example of not "reading between the lines"?
Another woo. How many woos frequent this place?

Not that anybody asked for all of them, but is this true? I can't write: I heard this great song. The lyrics say:.............

Did I just break the law?

I don't know but I do know that as brilliant as the lyrics to Assassins are I would diminish them by posting them out of context.

I have no idea, probably someone who rubbed a few out at the altar of Coulter..;)

But if by this comment you mean you were aware she made her preposterous claim, then your earlier post asserting that I had invented this claim of hers out of whole cloth is even more mystifying!

Now it's all about you and some thread we weren't all that interested in following when it was fresh. This thread is about my buddy Stephen Sondheim. I have several pictures of Steve and I together. I would post if my scanner didn't crap out on me recently but I promise to get them scanned by someone else to post on this thread if i can't get mine to work. He asked me to help choose female chorus members for his new show. He is looking for fresh, inexperienced new faces. Singing and dancing is not as important to him for this show as sincerity.

I do have those photos ;)

[quadraginta]

Is this an example of not "reading between the lines"?

Another woo. How many woos frequent this place?

<snip>


Huh.

I guess it is.

[theprestige]

Not really. I can't legally post all his lyrics and even if I could/did they would be out of context with the brilliant show they belong to. You will just have to see the show before judging.
Hogwash. Shows of this kind are customarily appeals to emotion and the senses. If Sondheim actually made a rational argument of some kind, and you understood it correctly, you should have no trouble reproducing it convincingly here, either in annotated excerpts or entirely paraphrased.

If Sondheim's claims require lights and props and costumes and assorted other stage magic in order to be convincing, you might as well tell me that the magician really does saw the girl in half "to the best of skeptical knowledge", and that I'll just have to see the magic show to understand.

[dudalb]

The Beggar's Opera comes to mind.
As does Sondheim's "Sweeney Todd".
In fact a common critical comment about Assasians was that Sondheim was trying for another "Sweeney Todd" but pretty much struck out this time.

[Senex]

Hogwash. Shows of this kind are customarily appeals to emotion and the senses.
Yes, and this is why I say this show is special.
If Sondheim actually made a rational argument of some kind, and you understood it correctly, you should have no trouble reproducing it convincingly here, either in annotated excerpts or entirely paraphrased.
OK, pick an assassin. I'll annotate or excerpt and embarrass you at the quality of just the lyrics.

If Sondheim's claims require lights and props and costumes and assorted other stage magic in order to be convincing, you might as well tell me that the magician really does saw the girl in half "to the best of skeptical knowledge", and that I'll just have to see the magic show to understand.
This paragraph demonstrates you are unfamiliar with theater. You have to watch a performance before judging. Taking the lyrics of a Sondheim song usually isn't satisfying but in this particular case it is true. Pick the assassin.

As does Sondheim's "Sweeney Todd".
In fact a common critical comment about Assasians was that Sondheim was trying for another "Sweeney Todd" but pretty much struck out this time.

That's bulloney. Where did you read that? Your spelling of "Assassins" is as true as your friends opinion.

[king catfish]

Does Operation: Mindcrime count?


Brilliant! \m/:D\m/

[Matthew Best]

That's bulloney. Where did you read that? Your spelling of "Assassins" is as true as your friends opinion.

And your spelling of "baloney" is - oh never mind.

[theprestige]

Yes, and this is why I say this show is special.

OK, pick an assassin. I'll annotate or excerpt and embarrass you at the quality of just the lyrics.

This paragraph demonstrates you are unfamiliar with theater. You have to watch a performance before judging. Taking the lyrics of a Sondheim song usually isn't satisfying but in this particular case it is true. Pick the assassin.



That's bulloney. Where did you read that? Your spelling of "Assassins" is as true as your friends opinion.
My mistake. I thought you were claiming that Sondheim was making a sound rational case for the motivations of several different assassins.

Now that I realize you're simply claiming that Sondheim writes good poetry and music, and puts on an emotionally exciting theatrical spectacle (which happens to be on the topic of assassins), I withdraw all my objections. I'm glad you enjoyed the show!

[Senex]

And your spelling of "baloney" is - oh never mind.
That's my historical alternative spelling for ************ ever since we can't use the original spelling.

My mistake. I thought you were claiming that Sondheim was making a sound rational case for the motivations of several different assassins.

Now that I realize you're simply claiming that Sondheim writes good poetry and music, and puts on an emotionally exciting theatrical spectacle (which happens to be on the topic of assassins), I withdraw all my objections. I'm glad you enjoyed the show!

Oh no you don't. I neither claimed Sondheim makes sound rational cases for different assassins motivations nor did I claim he puts on theatrical spectacals. You clearly are clueless concerning the difference between lyrics and poetry. I claim he wrote a show that demonstrates people (so far) who have attempted to assassinate the President all have something in common. I haven't said what it is but I will say it now: they all feel they failed at their chance for the American dream.

No conspiracies. Sondheim wrote an anti-conspiracy anthem for this show. He didn't write it because he is a skeptic, he wrote it because it is true.

I'm saying if you believe in what the JREF stands for you should bring your friends to see this brilliant show whenever you get a chance. This piece of theatre is what this website is about: critical thinking.

[theprestige]

I neither claimed Sondheim makes sound rational cases for different assassins motivations...
... Then what did you mean when you said
Every song explains the motivation of the assassin to the best of skeptical knowledge.
(emphasis mine) if not "a sound rational case"?

I claim he wrote a show that demonstrates people (so far) who have attempted to assassinate the President all have something in common. I haven't said what it is but I will say it now: they all feel they failed at their chance for the American dream.
Okay, now please explain how Sondheim supports this claim "to the best of skeptical knowledge".

What is Sondheim's definition of the American dream, and how did you determine that definition is up to the standard of "the best of skeptical knowledge"? Likewise for Sondheim's definition of a chance at that dream, and his definition of failure at that chance.

Finally, what does having something in common have to do with motivation? I'm sure these assassins had many things in common. Why rule out everything except failing at a chance at the American dream.

I mean, seriously, what does that even mean?

Not to mention the fact that there's plenty of people who have probably failed at their chance at the American dream (by somebody's definition, anyway), who don't go out and attempt to assassinate Presidents. So, "to the best of skeptical knowledge", there must be some other factors at work in motivating these assassins. Factors which neither you nor Sondheim appear to have considered.

[dudalb]

Uh, don't blame Sondheim for the words that Senex might put in his mouth.
Assisans is an interesting bit of theater, but Sondheim did not bring his A game to this one. A "Sweeney Todd" "Into the Woods" or "Sunday In The Park With George" it's not.
It just does not have the dark brilliance or "Sweeney Todd" .

[Redtail]

They burned down the gambling house - It died with an awful sound
Funky & Claude was running in and out, pulling kids out of the ground
I'm hungry for a candy bar, I think I'll eat a mounds.

Homer'd. :D

[Senex]

... Then what did you mean when you said

(emphasis mine) if not "a sound rational case"?
Fine, I enjoy Stephen Sondheim musicals. This particular musical overlaps what this website is about -- no conspiracies, take each event and investigate it on its own. It turns out that many of the people who tried to kill the President of the United States did have something in common, a conspiracy if you will, they all failed at the American dream. Watch the show and say this premise didn't work.

Okay, now please explain how Sondheim supports this claim "to the best of skeptical knowledge".
Sondheim doesn't spend his time supporting my claims.

What is Sondheim's definition of the American dream, and how did you determine that definition is up to the standard of "the best of skeptical knowledge"? Likewise for Sondheim's definition of a chance at that dream, and his definition of failure at that chance.
You're a piece of work. I'm way more likely to get laid than you ever are.

Finally, what does having something in common have to do with motivation? I'm sure these assassins had many things in common. Why rule out everything except failing at a chance at the American dream.

I mean, seriously, what does that even mean?
You and everyone reading this should watch this brilliant musical and decide for themself what it means.

Not to mention the fact that there's plenty of people who have probably failed at their chance at the American dream (by somebody's definition, anyway), who don't go out and attempt to assassinate Presidents. So, "to the best of skeptical knowledge", there must be some other factors at work in motivating these assassins. Factors which neither you nor Sondheim appear to have considered.
I think you believe you have failed at the American dream to be so worried about it.

It's not too late to turn your life around my friend.

Listen to Sondheim.

[Matthew Best]

Sondheim doesn't spend his time supporting my claims.


No-one expects him to. I think they'd like you to support your claims, though.

[brodski]

Have you accepted Sondheim as your personal lord and saviour? Or have you been drinking? This thread is a little... odd... to say the least.

[Senex]

brodski says:Have you accepted Sondheim as your personal lord and saviour? Or have you been drinking? This thread is a little... odd... to say the least.
Those two things are not mutually exclusive.

[theprestige]

Fine, I enjoy Stephen Sondheim musicals. This particular musical overlaps what this website is about -- no conspiracies, take each event and investigate it on its own. It turns out that many of the people who tried to kill the President of the United States did have something in common, a conspiracy if you will, they all failed at the American dream. Watch the show and say this premise didn't work.
I do not seriously doubt that this premise worked--as a Sondheim musical.

What I'm still confused about is this: Are you claiming it's a good musical? Or are you claiming it's a thorough, rational investigation that has produced sound, scholarly results?

Sondheim doesn't spend his time supporting my claims.
If what he spends his time on doesn't support your claims, why do you bother making claims about it? And if it does support your claims, why do you work so hard on not presenting it?

You're a piece of work. I'm way more likely to get laid than you ever are.
I suppose it's possible. What's your weekly average over the past ten years? More to the point, how is it relevant?

You and everyone reading this should watch this brilliant musical and decide for themself what it means.
There's already a huge list of things I just can't be bothered to pay attention to. What is so special about this musical that I should move it over to the "must do before I die" list?

I think you believe you have failed at the American dream to be so worried about it.
And yet I have no motivation to assassinate anybody. Clearly Sondheim is epically wrong in his analysis.

It's not too late to turn your life around my friend.

Listen to Sondheim.
No, thanks. The last time I listened to Sondheim, I became convinced that anybody who failed at their chance at the British Dream would end up becoming a murdering hairdresser or possibly a cannibal baker. Bleurgh.

[Praktik]

Ha! Glad to see the tenor of this thread has remained unchanged...:)

good work Senex :rolleyes:

[Senex]

I do not seriously doubt that this premise worked--as a Sondheim musical.

What I'm still confused about is this: Are you claiming it's a good musical? Or are you claiming it's a thorough, rational investigation that has produced sound, scholarly results?
I'm saying that the demographic of people who troll the History, Literature and Arts section of the JREF are likely to appreciate the musical Assassins.

I suppose it's possible. What's your weekly average over the past ten years? More to the point, how is it relevant?
Yeah, pick the last ten years to compare. It's no secret I've been on a dry spell. But who has the better chance tonight based on this thread? You just shot yourself in the foot my friend. Girls love honesty (and optimism) ;)

There's already a huge list of things I just can't be bothered to pay attention to. What is so special about this musical that I should move it over to the "must do before I die" list?
This musical is too good for you. Don't ever see it. I'm bullying you right now Don't ever see it!:mad:

And yet I have no motivation to assassinate anybody. Clearly Sondheim is epically wrong in his analysis.
I haven't hit the dream and you best not be sitting next to me in the theatre next performance.

No, thanks. The last time I listened to Sondheim, I became convinced that anybody who failed at their chance at the British Dream would end up becoming a murdering hairdresser or possibly a cannibal baker. Bleurgh.
As good as the Johnny Depp adaption of Sweeney Todd was Assassins is even a stronger show.

Ha! Glad to see the tenor of this thread has remained unchanged...:)

good work Senex :rolleyes:

hehehe... and any tenor of violence was just a joke, I'm harmless :)

[theprestige]

I'm saying that the demographic of people who troll the History, Literature and Arts section of the JREF are likely to appreciate the musical Assassins.

Wording that more clearly in the OP might have avoided our entire dialog. Feature? Or bug? You decide!

Yeah, pick the last ten years to compare. It's no secret I've been on a dry spell. But who has the better chance tonight based on this thread? You just shot yourself in the foot my friend. Girls love honesty (and optimism) ;)
The guy in the decade-long drought knows what girls like? I guess it's true what they say: Hope springs eternal.

And here I was trying to give you a long enough timeline to even out any "humps" in the road.

And again, how is this relevant?

This musical is too good for you. Don't ever see it. I'm bullying you right now Don't ever see it!:mad:
Done and done!

[QUOTE]I haven't hit the dream and you best not be sitting next to me in the theatre next performance.
Too bad Sondheim didn't determine to the best of skeptical knowledge that missing the American dream made people cranky in theaters. Or snarky on web forums.

As good as the Johnny Depp adaption of Sweeney Todd was Assassins is even a stronger show.
Wait... this is all an elaborate hoax, isn't it? You don't actually like Sondheim's work at all, do you?

[David Wong]

Is this thread a hard-core conservative shrieking his assertions that he is a heterosexual over and over, while declaring his love for both a very mannish woman and musical theater?

Holy cow, that closet has a glass door on it. Come out already and stop making the people around you miserable.

[Senex]

Is this thread a hard-core conservative shrieking his assertions that he is a heterosexual over and over, while declaring his love for both a very mannish woman and musical theater?

Holy cow, that closet has a glass door on it. Come out already and stop making the people around you miserable.

hehehe... you got me. The truth is I like girls. Go figure.

[Darth Rotor]

No conspiracies. Sondheim wrote an anti-conspiracy anthem for this show. He didn't write it because he is a skeptic, he wrote it because it is true.


Lily von Shtupp: It's twoo, it's twoo.

Thanks, now I don't have to see the show.

DR

[Senex]

Lily von Shtupp: It's twoo, it's twoo.

Thanks, now I don't have to see the show.

DR

No, no, no.... you're missing the point DR. You have to see the show. It's all about seeing the show.