Ah yes, the world of stories. They are many and they are varied. Most are simply an encapsulation of our thoughts. - real only to the reader. That’s why I enjoy Money Circus. These are stories which resonate and they contain details which originate from elsewhere. I cannot verify these stories yet, for me, they step through possibility and into plausibility.
My subscription is approaching the annual mark and I’m happy to continue. Many thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Reading what you write stirs up the silt below moving my own hand towards whatever will make a mark. Reviewing the comments too is positively provocative. Same-same sentiment and little truths concisely typed with skill and grace my own crayon-like sophistication admires. Moneycircus thrums connective tissue out of sight out of mind like a surgeon brushing nerves unknown that interlace parts way distant. I for one respect the outward reach by Mr. Moneycircus to gather in more from the unseen audience out here. Keep writing.
Unfortunately the simplification of everything was well underway before the net. One example: the translation “industry”. Dostoevsky has had a “makeover” from a husband/wife couple – Pevear and Volokhonsky who have been the beneficiaries of a relentless hype train for decades now. This has led to a backlash mainly from sites usually referred to as “conservative” or “Right Wing” – but that is because the critics of P&V have no other outlet available to them. And haven’t we seen that situation again and again with covid?
But you can see the problem: How many readers of Dostoevsky or Tolstoy etc. can read both Russian and English? They are obviously dependant on translators and few have the time and patience to trail through every translation available. Hence the hype machines are on to a winner there – provided they have sufficient money and resources at their disposal.
Result: the streamlining of a cultural treasure through a filter which will determine how that treasure will be presented to future generations. It’s quite disturbing.
Critical thinking is essential in determining what to read, when to stop and what to believe. We can choose free thought but it takes material effort.
The wrapper has become more important than the substance to attract consumers. In the product development stage the media starts with a narrative, the brewer starts with a witty name and the author starts with a hook.
How to grow is the question for any enterprise from the corporate conglomerate to the one man show. I discovered Moneycircus in a zerohedge forum. I don't recall the hook but I stayed for the substance. In turn I have referred it to other freethinkers who have a propensity to look behind the magicians curtain. As you mentioned less people are reading but they are listening. Guest appearances on a podcast or two improves discoverability.
Ah yes, the world of stories. They are many and they are varied. Most are simply an encapsulation of our thoughts. - real only to the reader. That’s why I enjoy Money Circus. These are stories which resonate and they contain details which originate from elsewhere. I cannot verify these stories yet, for me, they step through possibility and into plausibility.
My subscription is approaching the annual mark and I’m happy to continue. Many thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Reading what you write stirs up the silt below moving my own hand towards whatever will make a mark. Reviewing the comments too is positively provocative. Same-same sentiment and little truths concisely typed with skill and grace my own crayon-like sophistication admires. Moneycircus thrums connective tissue out of sight out of mind like a surgeon brushing nerves unknown that interlace parts way distant. I for one respect the outward reach by Mr. Moneycircus to gather in more from the unseen audience out here. Keep writing.
Unfortunately the simplification of everything was well underway before the net. One example: the translation “industry”. Dostoevsky has had a “makeover” from a husband/wife couple – Pevear and Volokhonsky who have been the beneficiaries of a relentless hype train for decades now. This has led to a backlash mainly from sites usually referred to as “conservative” or “Right Wing” – but that is because the critics of P&V have no other outlet available to them. And haven’t we seen that situation again and again with covid?
But you can see the problem: How many readers of Dostoevsky or Tolstoy etc. can read both Russian and English? They are obviously dependant on translators and few have the time and patience to trail through every translation available. Hence the hype machines are on to a winner there – provided they have sufficient money and resources at their disposal.
Result: the streamlining of a cultural treasure through a filter which will determine how that treasure will be presented to future generations. It’s quite disturbing.
Critical thinking is essential in determining what to read, when to stop and what to believe. We can choose free thought but it takes material effort.
The wrapper has become more important than the substance to attract consumers. In the product development stage the media starts with a narrative, the brewer starts with a witty name and the author starts with a hook.
How to grow is the question for any enterprise from the corporate conglomerate to the one man show. I discovered Moneycircus in a zerohedge forum. I don't recall the hook but I stayed for the substance. In turn I have referred it to other freethinkers who have a propensity to look behind the magicians curtain. As you mentioned less people are reading but they are listening. Guest appearances on a podcast or two improves discoverability.