Live Earth Concerts! Wow! Amazing! Worldwide Concerts! Musicians Showing They Care!
I guess that there are enough people asking about the carbon footprint of the Live Earth concerts for me not to need to bother. And there have already been articles in The Guardian about how people like Sting's wife will take an 80-mile helicopter trip to fly to someone's country estate in order to discuss environmental issues with them. So the whole hypocrisy of the artists thing has also been said. I don't know where this leaves me the lone quasi-unread blogger trying to re-establish a sense of engagement after weeks of stupefaction and quiet desperation in the face of...whatever historians will call this time of ours.
Back to Live Earth. Will it be more successful in effecting change for the better than were Live Aid, Farm Aid, or whatever other concerts were put on to change the world? I don't think so. We are now at the point where symbols and intent and flamboyant displays of concern are I think becoming quite superfluous. We all need to quietly start consuming less and giving more to eachother, basta.
Back to Live Earth. Will it be more successful in effecting change for the better than were Live Aid, Farm Aid, or whatever other concerts were put on to change the world? I don't think so. We are now at the point where symbols and intent and flamboyant displays of concern are I think becoming quite superfluous. We all need to quietly start consuming less and giving more to eachother, basta.
Posted at 7/07/2007 03:37:00 PM UTC
Permanent Link
5 Comment(s):
I don't buy the hypocrisy argument. One can always find a bone to pick with these events, but the organizers are keenly aware of the issue and are taking strides to minimize their impact or offset it.
This is an education at a mass level that I think can do good. Most of these artists do this for their living. They'd be performing or touring anyway. Having them at these venues could be viewed as an efficient way to reach the most amount of people with the fewest amount of separate concerts.
From a technology standpoint such an event today has the means to be more effective through the use of newer technology as well.
The real hypocrisy is coming from all those people expressing a false concern about the carbon footprint of these events. These are the same people who deny global warming is being caused by man, so why the hell should they even care?
They don't - they're just looking to deflect attention from the issues.
Let me clarify: all these artists of course perform for a living.
That's just it though. The way they are doing it makes them easy marks for global warming deniers that want to point out their hypocrisy. It makes it too easy for these obtuse anti-environmentalists people to discount the movement. I watched part of the Live Earth show on TV after writing this blog entry and both me and my wife were blown away by the increbidly ostentatious, energy-intensive light and digital displays behind the stage. This thing was using huge amounts of energy, and in my own opinion it was being done to preach to the choir, so to speak.
Let's see what the outcome is. But if you think that the nature of the energy use of the show combined with the lifestyles of the perfomers is not going to be a liability for the message, then you underestimate our opponents in this game.
With the exception of the screens the lighting was clearly low wattage strips or bulbs combined with and low tech encassings. I don't think it was ostentatious.
And I don't think they were preaching just to the converted. These shows played to a youthful and probably unaware audience.
Watch Al Gore's polling numbers go up after this event and tell me the message wasn't getting across to people.
Frankly I'm amused at all the wingnuts who denied themselves the chance to watch a unique show because of their anti-global warming beliefs.
Plain Jen emerging from under her rock here!
Can't get 'Plain Jen' to work, so am posting under 'anonymous.'
First of all, hey there hi there ho there to you guys; it's been a crazy few months.
Second, you know where I stand on this issue. I have to claim a high degree of ignorance re: this particular event, however, as I did not see it. But I have read countless articles -in the alternative press - about the carbon footprints of Gore and his opulent homestead, Larry David's estranged wife and her private plane, etc., and I must say I find them disturbing. Is it too tall an order to ask someone to deliver a strong message while actually practicing what they preach, or at least tempering their excesses dramatically? I agree with Ian that the message is weakened if the 'messengers' don't do the very things that they say must be done to get this under control. It bolsters the positions of finger-pointing detractors and confuses/disappoints those of supporters
Post a Comment
All comments are welcome, however, rather than posting an Anonymous comment please consider selecting Other and providing your name or nickname so others know who you are. Thanks.