The Wall and Beyond (former: Is It Time to Reconsider the Message of "The Wall"?)
  • StrayDogStrayDog March 2013
    No, I’ve just mistaken you for a man. Sorry about that.

  • waveprojectwaveproject March 2013
    @stray dog

    i will take some time to let get your poem into my mind before i will ask you about it.

    here again is "smile of yellow" with the added vocal.

  • imspartacusimspartacus March 2013
    if you read that backwards theres a hidden message haha only joking. im bored x got nothing better to do
  • waveprojectwaveproject March 2013
    @stray dog

    as to your poem:

    i apologize my humple try to interprete it regarding it in the context of part 1,2, and 3.  would you mind to help me if i am wrong? for i really wish to understand it all!

    the warrior leaves the wall behind and gets to what is beyond of it? he turns from fighting to dancing and enters into eternity, becoming the sea? perspective and perception produced by mankind get lost in one single tear (of memories) ? he does this alone( but he is not lonely)?
    it´s the final decision to leave the social context?
  • waveprojectwaveproject March 2013
    @stray dog

    your interpretation of the meaning in my "humple
    lyrical outputs" is quite correct.what i " can see with my own eyes" is
    the net of connections between everything and, conequently, between
    everyone. it´s the main feeling of what i am trying to express in my
    music- the eternity of the universe expresses its unity, which we are
    involved in , within a glass of water if you want. in the second example
    i  take the view from earth to the sun and get aware of distances i am
    involved in by the fact of light which seems to be such a normal thing
    but becoming really wonderful by its objective reality.

    so this is my personal experience.i still can´t really say anything clear about my momentary attitude to this point of changing something or someone with those things but in the course of the last months it has turned to a certain maturity which actually has more or less to do with this thread as well. maybe i will be able to tell you more about it some weeks later.

    but it´s my passion. it´s an all- day- trip. it´s the emptyness in which i find fullness in which i feel there is some kind of distance from anything what is human.......

    would you say about yourself that you turn away from manind in some way?
  • StrayDogStrayDog March 2013
    Anyone who has undertaken an ancient feat of reading this thread through is more or less acquainted with my views on the current state of things, our society’s “brilliant” prospects, social action and us - glorious human species - in general. So it can be easily presumed that I would hardly hold high expectations for human behaviour. Still, to be perfectly honest, I cannot simply believe in what’s been happening on this Forum since Roger made his latest statement on Israel.

    First of all, I should say that this is a very serious issue. I wanted to say a couple of things on it in any one of recently initiated threads at first, but then I remembered that my Trollish was really bad. So, maybe I’ll resurrect my other “political” topic:

    and do it there - in somewhat less hysterical environment - a bit later.

    Here I will just say this. Roger has undertaken some action. I consider it a rather controversial action - probably for very different reasons than those who are talking to themselves in the threads mentioned - but, as I said, I plan to touch upon it shortly. However, I certainly respect anyone who is still capable of any action at all. And what reaction do we observe here - on Roger’s site, among his followers?

    I must admit that I wouldn’t call myself a Roger’s fan.  Nor anybody else’s. The term sounds stupid enough to me in principle. But I can’t believe that the only person who opened her mouth and stood up for Roger on his own site was Yellow Rose - a girl, I guess - (hardly a guy with taste so refined that being far beyond my scope) - but, obviously, the only one with some cojones here. I can understand Patrick or anybody else who disagree like conceptually. But what’s the fucking matter with the rest of you?

    Oh, my mistake - there was one more fellow who made a statement. And instantly reinforced it with another - the previous one was his last. Way too much effort - he’s chosen to retire. Some other dude, more resembling a whining sissy, is babbling something here about Roger‘s “MUSIC”. Well, I should say Roger has been “banging his heart” with his music against such “buggers’ walls” for decades now. Obviously, all in vain. Have you understood a word from his songs, clown? It’s all about AWARENESS, RESPONSIBILITY and ACTION. Not about running away with the tail between your legs in the direction of your rocking chair. By the way, this object will be remaining a cosy refuge for a very short while now anyway. But as Paul neatly rephrased John: “No one is blinder than he who will not see”.

    But enough about that. I’ll try to provide a more serious contribution into deliberations on this subject soon.

  • StrayDogStrayDog March 2013

    As to the poem:

    You have got it partially right - at least in terms of the general direction of its message. But you may have confused a few details.

    What you’re right about is not perceiving it as something hopeless and the concluding image as irrefutably tragic. The “warrior’s last dance” is indeed not the same thing as the “last dance”.

    But the “final decision to leave the social context” is not the main subject here. The decision to leave this context as part of the whole “perspective and perception produced by mankind” occurs in the first three lines. It’s the choice one has to make in order to abandon the world of cosy descriptions and unattainable illusions - however comforting they may seem and heartrending this parting can be. To get “outside the wall”. And to start a journey towards “eternal seas”. After that one is always alone (but not lonely) and forever in the fight.

    And, if one succeeds on this path, pursuing the “time of fate”, not of “chance” (the former meant not as something pre-determined, but rather something each instance of which one takes full responsibility for), then at the end there is this last stand. It corresponds with the way the word “edge” is used here - it implies several meanings at once: extreme danger, extreme vigour, the extreme limit of something and the point just before a crucial change. It is dancing on the edge of eternity, the final battle - not against something, but to get somewhere. It is overcoming the last limit, the last boundary to enter the infinite. To “become the sea”.

    I also tried to get it written so that it could be seen from two angles. Like if you look at it from “mankind’s perspective” it’s something intensely sad. But if you look at it from the perspective of the “warrior” - it’s something full of hope. And, hopefully, beauty. That’s precisely what I’m trying to do in my screenplay. So, both things are in strict accordance with the vector I’ve been trying to outline in Parts 1-3.

    I should also say that I thought that I had made my attitude towards “mankind” crystal clear in this thread - in the dialogue in particular. And I thought that you had already had some understanding of it. But it looks like you might have some very serious misconceptions about one or two things. One of them concerns you. The other one is universal.

    I may be wrong - so feel free to correct any of my errors of judgment. But as far as I can see you tend to dodge challenges. I’m saying this not in order to provide you with another one, but because it’s critically important. Moreover, it’s not like you are dodging some of them in order to be able to get fully focused on some other ones. You seem to be trying to avoid any. Whereas the only way to move forward is to face them. The hero in the poem does not dodge his battles. Not because he’s a natural born fighter. And a person’s psychological disposition has nothing to do with it. You can be somewhat militant or quite peaceful by nature - it doesn’t really matter. But embracing challenges is the only way to go anywhere at all. I could provide a number of examples, but I believe you’re quite aware of them yourself.  

    And the other interconnected thing - this “leaving the social context” and “turning away from mankind” one. The dialogue from Part 1 alone provides sufficient grounds to rationalize the ultimate inevitable futility of social action. But that’s beside the point. We’re not talking about social action. We’re talking about some particular person’s one - yours, for example. And it’s either right or wrong - circumstances are irrelevant. The social environment, for instance, is just some kind of training field in a way. But the point is that if you’re unable to face and properly handle somewhat moderate and manageable challenges posed by the “social context”, what makes you think that you will be able to cope with tremendous ones posed by the “eternal context”?

    This journey towards “eternal seas” ain’t no picnic by no freaking means at all. It has nothing to do with a bunch of happy “peace and love” folks, who have realized their unity, let it transpire within the parameters of social reality and are horsing around under the rainbow now in a highly spiritual way with flowers in their hair. To pursue any such ideas would constitute a profoundly erroneous approach. Because it’s much more like what I said in the poem it is - a constant fight which requires all you have at any given moment. It’s also the fight that you can loose.

    So this “leaving the social context” thing is not about making it easier for you. It has nothing to do with Pink’s isolation. It’s not about “turning away from mankind” simply because you’ve somehow happened to get disappointed in this “cruel world”. Or discovered the futility of social action. It’s going to another level. And you do not go to the next level simply by having such a fancy or talking about it. Nor by skipping the previous one. So we can surely have some more of this two-middle-aged-ladies-in-the-country-club style chattering on exquisitely spiritual topics. But until it induces some action it remains simply talking. And I wouldn’t cherish any illusions about it being something “very important”. We could just talk about sports or cars instead.

  • churchmileschurchmiles March 2013
    Good to see you back dog, at last something to think about. All this hate going on is not good for ones soul. You should know that being so well educated and stuff. All that meet you round the back of the bike shed for a fight nonsense. Come on guys lets show some maturity. Another dude left the show because of somebody elses words. Damn why cant we live together. ??
  • waveprojectwaveproject April 2013
    @stray dog

    you are absolutely wrong to think about me to dodge challenges. it´s more that you seem not to understand the way i face them. i think you can try to estimate a person within a discussion of a thread but  i don´t think that it ´s very helpful to judge somebody without knowing him really. dont´forget the linguistic barriers between us. maybe we can go on in german if you like and you will receive more details about what i think, feel and act?
    generally you are right to say" the only way to move forward is to face them." the social context"which means real life provides to me enough of challenges coming from human relationships and the cultural work i am faced with every day. it´s me who is the one to make the decision which one of them to prefere to face or to dodge.

    concernig the "eternal context" i will go in later.

    so here you may listen to We Are The Sea" with the vox added

  • StrayDogStrayDog April 2013

    Albert, dear, I’ve never actually wanted to meet you for a fight. The idea was just to give you a chance to share your issues in a nice little psychiatric talk. So you can already step out of the puddle. And go back to your usual designation.

  • StrayDogStrayDog April 2013

    First of all, I’d venture to state that anyone who’s read this thread with some understanding would hardly expect me to judge anybody - on simple grounds of that being a total, utter and complete waste of time. It also doesn’t really look like linguistic barriers are of critical importance here (incidentally we could go in French or Spanish, for instance, but it so happened that the language of international communication and this Forum as well is English).

    But we have been having a “very important” conversation here for quite some time, haven’t we? And just as you are fully entitled to point out in a well-founded way any inconsistencies in my thinking and action, I reserve for myself the right to do the same in respect of you or anybody else.

    Of course, I don’t know you well - to be more precise, I don’t know you at all. Of course, I have no idea about your, undoubtedly extensive, social practices outside this site - my knowledge in this regard is naturally confined to what is happening here. But what does it have to do with the fact that you're one of those who didn’t bother to provide a single line of response to this Israel thing, for example - having delivered, at the same time, three other, not exactly urgent, posts?

    Let’s abandon our glorious ourselves for a while and try to look at this situation with Roger’s eyes. Let’s imagine unimaginable - that he’s actually following this Forum. Now, he undertakes some action. Then he goes to his site for some feedback from people who are supposed to be willing at least to try to understand him. And what does he see? Nothing. I mean - nothing. What is he left to think? Roger is a wealthy person. He is not exactly 18. “What the … ”? Unlike you, he can buy himself an escape from the “social context”, or a very persuasive illusion of it at any rate. And, really, what the … ?  

    So, you don’t have to agree with him. Disagree with him. But say something at least. Do not pose like nothing is going on or you are just not here. Especially after all your claims to be somehow different. And it’s certainly up to you to make your choice as to what challenges to accept and what to dodge. But it‘s certainly up to me to draw my conclusions while observing your choices - which is very different from judging if I may note.

    And going back to this social/eternal context thing. Since it’s the most important theme of this thread in a certain sense and out of respect for your linguistic troubles let me put it here in a very basic way. Because the situation is, in fact, quite simple.

    Say, they are bombing your, not somebody else’s, home tomorrow. Literally. With you. And your wife. And your children who came to visit. Will you be able to change realities, escape this one, and thus protect yourself? Will you be able, as soon as tomorrow, to protect your family in any other way based on your realizations and witnessing “the net of connections between everything and, consequently, everyone”?

    If the answer is yes, then you’re talking sense.

    However, if the answer is no - which, I believe, it is - then you are simply uttering pretentious claptrap. In this case you’re very much in this reality. Moreover, you are up to your ears in the “social context”. And there is no way how you can leave it.  

    But what you can, and probably should do, is to withdraw your head out of your spiritual clouds in order to admit this obvious fact. And start to actually do something about it. Otherwise you simply remain just another sorry piece of cannon fodder. Another sheep being driven by external powers in the direction of the slaughter house. And all your spirituality is nothing more than just another kind of our old good path of least resistance - it’s just that your one is paved with illusions which are somewhat more sublime. And you’ve heard about Christians, right? Those guys have a whole bunch of realizations and “personal experiences” to brag about too - they think that they are talking to Jesus Christ when praying, for instance.

  • churchmileschurchmiles April 2013
  • StrayDogStrayDog June 2013
    Here is another pretty recent piece - “Amnesia” from the latest DCD album “Anastasis” - which, along with the mentioned above “Melancholia” movie, is among those that seem to reflect on our present situation and its origins in a pretty adequate way (as far as its first part is concerned at least - sadly, I do not see any particular justification for a ghost of hope that tries to emerge closer to the end):

    The lyrics can be obtained here:

  • CorneliusCornelius June 2013
  • umpb
  • this one is a good refelction of the state as well. producer is peter joseph.
  • in this clip, peter really has very effectfully adapted the scenes from his movies to the lyrics and so has put his message into an emotional level.
  • bump
  • StrayDogStrayDog July 2013

    This would be a glimpse into Beyond The Wall - the death of ego indeed, probably the only actual way out:

    The lyrics:

  • probalbly yes, stray dog, probably.

    i like the complikated, not easy definable rhythym of that song and the coming up tension by the strings.
  • StrayDogStrayDog July 2013
    Yes. The song is beautifully chaste - to the point of transparency - in a way. But, on the other hand, the rhythmical pattern is indeed highly intricate. Which makes the piece just as beautifully elusive. Both compounded create a perfect representation of “real reality”, don’t they?


    As for PJ - I think that Peter is honestly trying. I do not think that he is “another fucking clown”. However … if we try to look at things realistically:

    It would take another hundred posts to reflect on all his points properly, but if to touch upon the main one only and put it really-really briefly.

    I’m neither a scientist nor an engineer so I won’t be able to say anything regarding the technical workability of all those resource based economy ideas. Let’s say they are workable. I’m not sure, as I believe I have already mentioned somewhere at the beginning of the thread, if I agree with Peter as far as factors that conditioning human beings’ consciousness are concerned. It’s a critical point, in fact, but let’s consider it auxiliary for now - in view of my main objection/worry. Which is a transition means/period.

    The truth is that we are not standing on the crossroads at the moment. Where we’d be able to choose freely, calmly and logically among options available letting pure reason to be our guide. We are effectively speeding towards an abyss with constantly increasing velocity {was that p-a-r-a-n-o-i-d enough?:)}. Under the circumstances how can such paradigmatic changes be possibly introduced across the entire society? Even if gradually? Nohow. It’s impossible. I’m sorry but it is.

    Just one example. In order to actually implement those ideas we need to say goodbye to our current monetary system. But we have already allowed the situation with it to have come way too far. We will have to deal with the consequences first. Who’s going to do it? Taking into account that nobody is inclined to accept any responsibility for them whatsoever - neither the Elites nor the Masses? Not to mention that Fresco is right when he says: “The ‘in’ group will do all it can to stay in power … They will use … whatever they have [including war] to keep it. They’re not going to give it up because they do not know of any other system that will perpetuate their kind.” Sad but true. What can be opposed to this group and massive opportunities that they’ve managed to accumulate? Some common will? Awakened mass consciousness? Oneness? Come on … Fresco and Joseph - a couple of people who are fully aware of the current state of things and its implications and seem to be genuinely willing to contribute into making the world a better place - failed to come to understanding even between themselves. A certain Mr. Waters failed to come to terms with Mr. Kubrick. And so on ad infinitum. Now - how are the Israelis expected to come to terms with the Palestinians? Liberals with Libertarians? Neocons with anybody else? I still do not gamble, but if you want me to make the second ‘sure’ bet in this season - it will never happen. It cannot happen. It’s just as sad. But just as true.

    So participating in those activities may make sense if it somehow makes you personally happy. But I’m afraid that it’d be the only actual constructive outcome that can be reasonably expected from doing so.

    Concerning “InterReflections” - I just know the stuff that is available on the Internet. Judging by what Peter is saying about it, I’m glad that he’s becoming aware of what art is actually all about. The essence of its nature is one of the reasons why I’m writing my screenplay. But my message is different.

  • yes , they do. in combination with the movie i get a magnificant and frightening feeling of :no way out but to leave all behind.

    i agrre with your points of failing" to come to understanding even between themselves" this is exactly the point i am missing i peter´s movies and to express it clearly: i also don´t believe that any movement, idea, single person or community is able to stop that"p-a-r-a-n-o-i-d enough"train to abyss.

    participating somehow for me doesn´t mean to "happy" . i am curious about it but i HAVE my inner doupts and as far as i can see they WILL be proved. sadly, and i don´t think that i need to make a bet. i have changed within the last months. but again, it´s an attempt.

    and as to that point of coming to terms: this is core problem. not the change of any system. what doesn´t work within communities, between countries- whatever -cannot work between you and me as well.

    so, that question of human nature, in my view, is not that easy to be answered like jaques did it when saying we are a production of education.

    would you mind to explain the last paragraph by more details- to draw some comparisons between the messages maybe?
  • StrayDogStrayDog July 2013
    From my mailbox I gather that you are yet to properly check yours - 'cause a couple of items are supposed to be there, connected directly with the last paragraph.

  • i´m sorry, i didn´t get that- care to elaborate?
  • StrayDogStrayDog July 2013
    I'll try: check your FREAKING EMAIL :)

    (that was meant to say that I've sent you a couple of emails a couple of days ago which had something to do with the last paragraph)

  • i regret that i have to tell you that i haven´t got any. i´ll send you one , ok.?

  • Greenandsubmarine September 2013

    i have stated something similar before elsewhere on this site and i will restate the gist of what i'd said before here now.

    Although on one level The Wall, then and now, is summed up quite well with the three words Fear Builds Walls, i would add that Waters seems to be saying that It Is Easy To Become What Oppresses You.

    This runs parallel to ideas brought into being by Carl Jung, whose concept of The Shadow helps us remember that if we are so busy righteously pointing out the wrongdoings and evils of others, we run a major risk of enacting an equal and opposite wrongdoing and/or evil in response to them.

    Such a response is not justified, so it is important to go inward and see the resident evil, if you'd like.

    By the time of The Trial, Pink has revealed himself to have not previously fully disclosed how he has a hand in the misery of himself and certain key others, his wife, and others who he later, in Outside The Wall, praises for "giving their all..."

    He gives us just enough information, that his wife has cheated on him, that school was rotten, that life can be frightening, that mothers can be smothering, that hungry consumerism (see What Shall We Do Now?) doesn't really work, and that the drugs don't work (Another Brick 3).

    So, he feels incredibly isolated.

    He finds that isolation isn't the answer either.

    All of The Wall, from Hey You until Outside The Wall, is about reestablishing contact with others, being human again, figuring out the source of one's isolation and fear, yet not succumbing to fear to the point that you become a monster to live with, a bigger monster than the one(s) that left you isolated yourself.

    This is what makes The Wall such a fantastic morality play, such a universal message, so endlessly relevant and resonant.

    Who doesn't feel like this to some extent at some point or stretch of time in their life?


  • StrayDogStrayDog September 2013
    That’s right. Those are several major points of the overall message of the album. And the part that promotes total personal responsibility at all levels of human existence should probably never be reconsidered, rather be carved in stone – unfortunately, very few people seem to be prepared to actually follow this maxim with any consistency when their own action is concerned (the author of its artistic expression in question included). As for “reestablishing contact with others” – that’s precisely the part which was proposed for consideration. And, as of today, I’m afraid I still think that it should be reconsidered, at least as far as seen through the prism of what's going on throughout our society – for the reasons which were put forward and analyzed in the thread.


Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership

Welcome to the message board. Please be courteous to all your fellow forum users.

Contact with any issues.