Some Social Experiment

[peewee_RotA]

Here's a story that I've heard a couple times and I came across again today.


A man sat at a metro station in Washington DC and started to play the violin; it was a cold January morning. He played six Bach pieces for about 45 minutes. During that time, since it was rush hour, it was calculated that 1,100 people went through the station, most of them on their way to work.

Three minutes went by, and a middle aged man noticed there was musician playing. He slowed his pace, and stopped for a few seconds, and then hurried up to meet his schedule.

A minute later, the violinist received his first dollar tip: a woman threw the money in the till and without stopping, and continued to walk.

A few minutes later, someone leaned against the wall to listen to him, but the man looked at his watch and started to walk again. Clearly he was late for work.

The one who paid the most attention was a 3 year old boy. His mother tagged him along, hurried, but the kid stopped to look at the violinist. Finally, the mother pushed hard, and the child continued to walk, turning his head all the time. This action was repeated by several other children. All the parents, without exception, forced them to move on.

In the 45 minutes the musician played, only 6 people stopped and stayed for a while. About 20 gave him money, but continued to walk their normal pace. He collected $32. When he finished playing and silence took over, no one noticed it. No one applauded, nor was there any recognition.

No one knew this, but the violinist was Joshua Bell, one of the most talented musicians in the world. He had just played one of the most intricate pieces ever written, on a violin worth $3.5 million dollars.

Two days before his playing in the subway, Joshua Bell sold out at a theater in Boston where the seats averaged $100.

This is a real story. Joshua Bell playing incognito in the metro station was organized by the Washington Post as part of a social experiment about perception, taste, and priorities of people. The outlines were: in a commonplace environment at an inappropriate hour: Do we perceive beauty? Do we stop to appreciate it? Do we recognize the talent in an unexpected context?

One of the possible conclusions from this experience could be:

If we do not have a moment to stop and listen to one of the best musicians in the world playing the best music ever written, how many other things are we missing?


I have to call BS on this. You can't measure somebody's appreciation of something by inconveniencing them. It's like saying: "Why didn't you appreciate the Mona Lisa as it fell out of a window and hit your grandmother?"

O.k. that was extreme but I still think the story is dumb.

[quadz]

You can't measure somebody's appreciation of something by inconveniencing them.

Apparently that was explicitly part of what the study was attempting to ascertain:

http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/bell.asp

Weingarten set up the event "as an experiment in context, perception and priorities — as well as an unblinking assessment of public taste: In a banal setting at an inconvenient time, would beauty transcend?"

Survey says: 

[The Happy Friar]

If people didn't have hardship in life. people would be doing more of what they enjoy, rather than being in a continual rat race to get ahead of the next person. Of course, it is basic human instinct to strive in whatever effort they endeavor. However when presented with alot more options, I'm sure the world would be a much more different place...

I don't believe so.  People in the USA still work long hours, spend lost of time worrying about how they're going to pay bills, take care of kids, etc.  People in some 3rd world countries do the exact same thing and they don't have cars, safe housing, fancy gadgets, utilities, a government "safety net", etc. 

The less hardship people get the more reasons they come up with to give a reason to have more hardship (IE I need a new whatever, we deserve a whatever, let's go to wherever).  A generalization, won't work if you pick someone out of a room, but the housing and economic collapse of the 1st world pretty much show it's true (While car companies and bank got bailed out people complained about the cost of food going up but still wanted to spend their $$ on non-necessity items vs necessity items like food).  Someone in Africa can't afford wheat to make their bread, we can't afford to buy HDTV's yet both complain about how hard their life is and they deserve better.   People in this country get food stamps and have DirectTV dishes on their house.  Someone somewhere with nothing begs for a dollar to buy some rice.  The worst off of us has it better then most of the best in most other countries.

[peewee_RotA]

To expand on my point, we set aside time to do things. We set aside time to experience art. Would you enjoy trying to watch your favorite movie and conducting a business meeting at the same time? Does choosing to turn off the movie in order to conduct the meeting represent not being able to perceive beauty?

No, it represents having your freaking priorities straight. You set aside a time and place to work. A time and place to enjoy movies. A time and place to sleep. This is simple human thinking.

[peewee_RotA]

Let me use this analogy. You're playing Single player Left 4 dead. No human competitors. Most of your team is going to cooperate to get past the obstacles. a small minority might run around and try to troll the server.  then they would leave because there is no real purpose to it. why? you ask? people are working in a cooperative environment instead of a competitive one. you won't hear a whole lot of smack talking or horseplay as much as you would come across it on another competetive mode.  when competition is not abundant, people have more choices available.

 

going to work = playing video games

I like the world you live in.

[peewee_RotA]

Top 1% control more wealth than 99%

Don't you have a city park to squat in? 

[reaper]

Weingarten set up the event "as an experiment in context, perception and priorities — as well as an unblinking assessment of public taste: In a banal setting at an inconvenient time, would beauty transcend?"

Why should "beauty transcend"?  You want him to play on the side of the highway in rush hour or something, what did they expect?  No one was rude to him, people who had time probably stopped and listened since he was so good, and some people gave him some cash.

Top 1% control more wealth than 99%

Don't you have a city park to squat in?  nana

Should I be proud this country is more operationally successful than the communists? 

[haunted]

Most people wouldn't be working 60 hours if they didn't have to.  Of course alot of the populace has bought into the jersey shore mentality. consumerism. something as persons with meager means, would appreciate 1% of. No doubt society has sunk into a more dog eat dog society. "more for me less for you mentality".

You basically voiced and answered your own concern in this quote... Yes the country has sunk into a more dog eat dog society. And yes, "Most people wouldn't be working 60 hours if they didn't have to". These people aren't like me or my family, someone/who started out as dirt poor. I only had cable for a year while growing up or something, we had a huge antennae to pick up 10 channels on the roof. As most of you know, I was on 28.8k/56k until late 2006. THESE were the type of sacrifices we made so we weren't like the rest. We actually bought the vast majority of our family cars before making payments. My first car, a 97 tacoma, I bought for $7,800 before my 17th birthday, in full, because I had been saving since I was 14.

The problem is that people AREN'T willing to work 60 hour weeks. When I'm done with school, the position I'll have will be 84 hour weeks, and HELL YEAH to milking that shit for all it's worth in tough times. THAT is the American way. It's a dog-eat-dog society not because the big dogs are getting bigger, it's because the little dogs are getting weaker. The "new" American way is if you can't hack it, just file for unemployment / collect food stamps.....if your business can't hack it, then file for chapter 11. Plan B is becoming Plan A, by CHOICE, and it's hindering our society big time. People are comfortable/complacent in their world on their CPU, ipod, ipad, smartphone, etc. that they have no desire to "outdo people in their endeavors"(a basic human instinct you mentioned), because it's outside their reality which they're highly content with.

[peewee_RotA]

The problem is that people AREN'T willing to work 60 hour weeks. When I'm done with school, the position I'll have will be 84 hour weeks, and HELL YEAH to milking that shit for all it's worth in tough times. THAT is the American way. It's a dog-eat-dog society not because the big dogs are getting bigger, it's because the little dogs are getting weaker. The "new" American way is if you can't hack it, just file for unemployment / collect food stamps.....if your business can't hack it, then file for chapter 11. Plan B is becoming Plan A, by CHOICE, and it's hindering our society big time. People are comfortable/complacent in their world on their CPU, ipod, ipad, smartphone, etc. that they have no desire to "outdo people in their endeavors"(a basic human instinct you mentioned), because it's outside their reality which they're highly content with.

I like this comment a lot more than the original story I posted.

[Arm0r]

Maybe jaqueero didn't get the memo.

http://tastyspleen.net/quake/forums/index.php?topic=18266.0

[|iR|Focalor]

when competition is not abundant, people have more choices available.

Better red than dead, eh?

[|iR|Focalor]

Uh... what the hell does that have to do with anything? The problem with this country is not that 1% owns more of the wealth than 99%. The problem is that people like you (just like he mentions in the video) aren't capable of thinking for themselves. You watch a youtube video about George Carlin and all the sudden you think you've had this personal epiphany of enlightenment. So there's a select few who've risen to the top to make all the important decisions, a lot of which are based on money and sometimes pure greed. News flash bud, it's ALWAYS been that way. In every single civilization throughout history, that's how it's always been. It isn't something new. It's not like things in America were at one time perfect and then along came these hard-eyed pirates in suits jamming a sword in the smalls of our backs and nudging us towards the plank. It has ALWAYS been that way. That's what government and society IS. It's not their fault that they had more ambition and street smarts than people like you. If you don't like your situation, do something about it. It's competitive capitalist society which by and large no longer discriminates based on race and sex, which means choices are more abundant now than ever.

And like Haunted mentioned, it takes WORK and DETERMINATION. You think the corporate capos of the world got where they are easily? Fuck no, they had to fight and claw and sacrifice for it. Sometimes even THAT isn't enough to get you to the top. "The strong rule the weak, but the cunning rule over ALL." Maybe you just aren't smart and cunning enough to be in the 1%. That's no one's fault but your own.

What it sounds like you're suggesting is that the federal government should do more to regulate and rule what the business world is allowed to do. When someone has Big Brother telling them what to do and how it's gonna be, that equates to less choices no matter what shade of rose colored glasses you look at it with.

[|iR|Focalor]

The first time I attempt to have a real discussion and debate with you and you go and tap out before it even starts. I feel so cheated, baby.

[Arm0r]

Maybe jaqueero didn't get the memo.

http://tastyspleen.net/quake/forums/index.php?topic=18266.0

[ex]

This hits home for me, as I am a musician myself.  I'm nowhere near Bell, but I have noticed, as all musicians do, the lack of appreciation for fine arts.  Not just music, but all art and artists get routinely shit on by society that claims they appreciate the arts.

Case in point:  In the last 11 years, the music and art budget has been cut and cut and cut and cut before anything else was.

I think this quote by peewee ROTA says it all:

I have to call BS on this. You can't measure somebody's appreciation of something by inconveniencing them.

Inconveniencing... you know if the greatest minds from 500 years ago and before, or even just 200 years ago heard this, they would start rustling for weapons.  500 years ago, people in the elitist societies and artistry were SURE, DEAD SURE that with the way art was influencing the world, we would be doing the following things today:

Every day, this would be MANDATORY:

EVERYONE would be spending AT LEAST 3 hours of dedicated musical practice.
EVERYONE would be spending AT LEAST 3 hours of physical activity/health assurance.
EVERYONE would be working NO MORE than 6 hours a day.

We have COMPLETELY failed as a society.  Now the beliefs that were even inherent only 200 years ago, even 150 years ago, have been over the last 140 years summed up in one quote:

Inconvenience

That's what art is now.  An "inconvenience."

This world and most the people in it deserve the painful death that it gets.  We have lost our way in the name of greed and power.  It's sickening.