Some not happy about Grizzlies Champions Center...

[Grisly Fan]

No, no, no, you have it all wrong. The arts are graceful, uplifting, and a celebration of what it means to be human. There is simply nothing graceful about a receiver making a one handed catch, pinning the ball to the helmet of the opponent and maintaining control all the way to the ground. And how uplifting could 25000+ jumping to their feet possibly be? You could hardly call living vicariously through the athletic accomplishments of a 20 year old a rational celebration of anything human. Nope, art is for art sake and football is strictly brutal and exploitive and I am sure they could get Tarantino to come support them in the purity of their cause.

 

[Mousegriz]

As a woman who works for an arts organization primarily focused on children . . . AND LOVES FOOTBALL . . . it baffles me how many people have so much misconception and hostility and believe the two "cultures" - for lack of a better descriptor - should be mutually exclusive. The extremists on either 'side" believe that those in the arts are snooty, liberal and elitist; and those who love football are nothing but stupid neanderthals who worship thug athletes and excuse/ignore all personal behavior in favor of the pursuit of excellence on the football field - or gladiator arena if you will. And then there are the reasonable people thank God.

Here is a major difference that I have experienced, however. I find myself defending my passion for football to my artsy friends far more often than I have to defend my belief in the importance of theatre arts to my football friends.

What does that tell you?

GO GRIZ!!

Since you asked: "the arts are snooty, liberal and elitist"

Private funds are helping build some buildings (not just athletic) that public funds are going to have to maintain, upgrade and replace one day. Significant declines in enrollment but a brand new Missoula College, Gilkey Center, Champions Center, Academic Center...and go back 10 more years and add a similar number of new buildings. If you step back and look objectively you can kind of see how some people might feel.

If you build it they will come.....doesn't seem to be happening at UM over the past 10 years.

 

[Griz90]

I replied to each and every ridiculous comment with this simple response.

"The entire project is being paid for by private donations and doesn't cost the taxpayer a nickel. Now I suppose you want to control the decisions private citizens make with their donations. UM Athletics, specifically men's football and men's and women's basketball, make $ for UM. And the Champions Center will help that. At the public university level, athletics is part of the mission."

I'm probably not going to be very popular with some folks, but hey, I live on the other side of the planet as far as they are concerned.

 

[UMcheer2000]

As a woman who works for an arts organization primarily focused on children . . . AND LOVES FOOTBALL . . . it baffles me how many people have so much misconception and hostility and believe the two "cultures" - for lack of a better descriptor - should be mutually exclusive. The extremists on either 'side" believe that those in the arts are snooty, liberal and elitist; and those who love football are nothing but stupid neanderthals who worship thug athletes and excuse/ignore all personal behavior in favor of the pursuit of excellence on the football field - or gladiator arena if you will. And then there are the reasonable people thank God.

Here is a major difference that I have experienced, however. I find myself defending my passion for football to my artsy friends far more often than I have to defend my belief in the importance of theatre arts to my football friends.

What does that tell you?

GO GRIZ!!

Since you asked: "the arts are snooty, liberal and elitist"

Private funds are helping build some buildings (not just athletic) that public funds are going to have to maintain, upgrade and replace one day. Significant declines in enrollment but a brand new Missoula College, Gilkey Center, Champions Center, Academic Center...and go back 10 more years and add a similar number of new buildings. If you step back and look objectively you can kind of see how some people might feel.

If you build it they will come.....doesn't seem to be happening at UM over the past 10 years.

Because our marketing team is stuck in the stone ages...

 

[MsMaroon]

As a woman who works for an arts organization primarily focused on children . . . AND LOVES FOOTBALL . . . it baffles me how many people have so much misconception and hostility and believe the two "cultures" - for lack of a better descriptor - should be mutually exclusive. The extremists on either 'side" believe that those in the arts are snooty, liberal and elitist; and those who love football are nothing but stupid neanderthals who worship thug athletes and excuse/ignore all personal behavior in favor of the pursuit of excellence on the football field - or gladiator arena if you will. And then there are the reasonable people thank God.

Here is a major difference that I have experienced, however. I find myself defending my passion for football to my artsy friends far more often than I have to defend my belief in the importance of theatre arts to my football friends.

What does that tell you?

GO GRIZ!!

You enjoy watching guys flit around in tights as much as guys in helmets and pads?

:thumb:

 

[MsMaroon]

As a woman who works for an arts organization primarily focused on children . . . AND LOVES FOOTBALL . . . it baffles me how many people have so much misconception and hostility and believe the two "cultures" - for lack of a better descriptor - should be mutually exclusive. The extremists on either 'side" believe that those in the arts are snooty, liberal and elitist; and those who love football are nothing but stupid neanderthals who worship thug athletes and excuse/ignore all personal behavior in favor of the pursuit of excellence on the football field - or gladiator arena if you will. And then there are the reasonable people thank God.

Here is a major difference that I have experienced, however. I find myself defending my passion for football to my artsy friends far more often than I have to defend my belief in the importance of theatre arts to my football friends.

What does that tell you?

GO GRIZ!!

It tells me that's how you injured your shoulder...

:shock:

 

[bgbigdog]

As a woman who works for an arts organization primarily focused on children . . . AND LOVES FOOTBALL . . . it baffles me how many people have so much misconception and hostility and believe the two "cultures" - for lack of a better descriptor - should be mutually exclusive. The extremists on either 'side" believe that those in the arts are snooty, liberal and elitist; and those who love football are nothing but stupid neanderthals who worship thug athletes and excuse/ignore all personal behavior in favor of the pursuit of excellence on the football field - or gladiator arena if you will. And then there are the reasonable people thank God.

Here is a major difference that I have experienced, however. I find myself defending my passion for football to my artsy friends far more often than I have to defend my belief in the importance of theatre arts to my football friends.

What does that tell you?

GO GRIZ!!

Since you asked: "the arts are snooty, liberal and elitist"

Private funds are helping build some buildings (not just athletic) that public funds are going to have to maintain, upgrade and replace one day. Significant declines in enrollment but a brand new Missoula College, Gilkey Center, Champions Center, Academic Center...and go back 10 more years and add a similar number of new buildings. If you step back and look objectively you can kind of see how some people might feel.

If you build it they will come.....doesn't seem to be happening at UM over the past 10 years.

Because our marketing team is stuck in the stone ages...

What marketing team are you referring to? I have 25 years in the discipline and nothing I've seen leads me to believe the department exists. Nothing resembling a marketing function could be this inept.

 

[UMGriz75]

George Dennison, an historian by training, had adopted for UM the slogan "body, mind and spirit."

That was a well used phrase among the famous "British" universities set up between 1200 AD and the 1700s to provide education in the broadest sense, providing the maximum benefits to society. Sports were always seen as integral to the educational function. At Eton, although a high school, a student had to participate in three separate sports on a weekly basis, and major in one. This was the preparation for college, by which time physical habits and character development would be ingrained.

The usefulness was only seen in developing habits and benefits of physical rigor -- the statement on the Discobolos at the University of Montana reads "Health is the First of All Liberties" -- but more importantly in developing social skills, leadership skills and cooperation skills and, importantly, developing quick judgment skills under rapidly changing circumstances. The competitions engendered contact and communications with the schools outside. They created networks and expressed loyalties. French high schools and universities, in contrast, placed little such emphasis on such activities, preferring, typically, to enhance and polish their well-deserved reputations as snooty intellectuals and cheese-eating surrender monkeys, insisting, always, on speaking a silly language in a ridiculous accent.

After the Battle of Waterloo, and the destruction of Napolean's Grand Armee', Lord Wellington remarked that the battle was simply the inevitable result of differences in the training of the respective officer corps, that the British understood taking and giving orders, team play, playing formations and setting decisive goals and formulating game plans. In the midst of that, the need to exercise quick judgment. The French did not. The Battle of Waterloo had been won years before it was actually fought, he later observed, "it was won on the playing fields of Eton."

The founder of the modern Olympic Games noted the positive role that sports played in British culture, including its educational culture, and this had, indeed, given Britain a positive advantage in the world. He believed that re-instituting the Olympic Games could provide for the world what Britain had considered essential in its education system.

UM maintains echoes of this distinctly British legacy with its 2 credit HHP activity course (sport) requirement, offering 120 sections every semester, with typically 2,500 students participating at any given time, and this is outside of the ASUM Sport Club system, although the two are often closely tied.

The Champions Center is hugely symbolic, if nothing else, to a commitment to sport culture. Of course many oppose that, no matter who pays for it. They generally share all sorts of ideological similarities that disdain achievement, commitment, dedication and loyalty.

 

[GrizLA]

No, no, no, you have it all wrong. The arts are graceful, uplifting, and a celebration of what it means to be human. There is simply nothing graceful about a receiver making a one handed catch, pinning the ball to the helmet of the opponent and maintaining control all the way to the ground. And how uplifting could 25000+ jumping to their feet possibly be? You could hardly call living vicariously through the athletic accomplishments of a 20 year old a rational celebration of anything human. Nope, art is for art sake and football is strictly brutal and exploitive and I am sure they could get Tarantino to come support them in the purity of their cause.

Yes, I understand sarcasm. But, most people can walk and whistle at the same time. I am an ardent fan of UM athletics, and most collegiate athletics along with Fine and Performing Arts. Having lived in SoCal for years and now in South Carolina for half a year, I can assure you that the monetary returns from athletics is substantial but, any one with a close look, can see the monetary significance of a well supported Performance Arts curriculum. USC, UCLA, Emerson, Columbia and many more have alumni from the performing arts that contribute heavily to the school, and they enjoy the athletic successes, as well. It takes a very poorly educated person to think one area of education is superior to another. I think, UM has some pretty solid bona fides in Hollywood, now and in the past, that have done much for the U, and I know the athletic programs have helped put UM in a national spotlight that others can only wish for. I would like to see increased funding for the fine arts, performing arts and athletics, and less for the law school, unless that law school can work with future and present performers and athletes as a primary end. Of course, that is a pipe dream

 

[jodcon]

 

[IdaGriz01]

As a woman who works for an arts organization primarily focused on children . . . AND LOVES FOOTBALL . . . it baffles me how many people have so much misconception and hostility and believe the two "cultures" - for lack of a better descriptor - should be mutually exclusive. The extremists on either 'side" believe that those in the arts are snooty, liberal and elitist; and those who love football are nothing but stupid neanderthals who worship thug athletes and excuse/ignore all personal behavior in favor of the pursuit of excellence on the football field - or gladiator arena if you will. And then there are the reasonable people thank God.

Here is a major difference that I have experienced, however. I find myself defending my passion for football to my artsy friends far more often than I have to defend my belief in the importance of theatre arts to my football friends.

What does that tell you?

GO GRIZ!!

It tells you that the "Two Cultures" is not a two-way street. I have extensively studied, and taught, the history of science and technology as it relates to the general "culture." One of my lecture/discussion topics was based on "The Two Cultures" (C. P. Snow, for those who don't know who popularized the term). Creativity in the sciences, or in athletics, is no different from so-called "artistic" creativity -- it is just another feature of human intellect and malleability. But the "intelligensia" have co-opted the term to make it refer only to "the arts" -- which is total BS.

On the other point. Over a half-century of living as an adult, I have personally known over a hundred people with scientific degrees who have exceptional skills in the "arts" -- some are/were absolutely professional level in music, artistic painting, choreography, stage-play writing and direction, movie production, and more. Those were their "hobbies." There are scientific fields where talented and interested "amateurs" can make significant contributions -- astronomy and archaeology come to mind, but there are others. I have met three ... and one of those was married to a degreed scientist. So it's not a level playing field. Technically trained people regularly engage in the arts, often at a high level. "Artsy" people almost never go the other way, and excuse their ignorance by claiming that technical skills don't involve (their versions) of creativity.

Who would have thought that a football fan board would devolve into a discussion of "The Two Cultures." :lol:

 

[Grisly Fan]

No, no, no, you have it all wrong. The arts are graceful, uplifting, and a celebration of what it means to be human. There is simply nothing graceful about a receiver making a one handed catch, pinning the ball to the helmet of the opponent and maintaining control all the way to the ground. And how uplifting could 25000+ jumping to their feet possibly be? You could hardly call living vicariously through the athletic accomplishments of a 20 year old a rational celebration of anything human. Nope, art is for art sake and football is strictly brutal and exploitive and I am sure they could get Tarantino to come support them in the purity of their cause.

Yes, I understand sarcasm. But, most people can walk and whistle at the same time. I am an ardent fan of UM athletics, and most collegiate athletics along with Fine and Performing Arts. Having lived in SoCal for years and now in South Carolina for half a year, I can assure you that the monetary returns from athletics is substantial but, any one with a close look, can see the monetary significance of a well supported Performance Arts curriculum. USC, UCLA, Emerson, Columbia and many more have alumni from the performing arts that contribute heavily to the school, and they enjoy the athletic successes, as well. It takes a very poorly educated person to think one area of education is superior to another. I think, UM has some pretty solid bona fides in Hollywood, now and in the past, that have done much for the U, and I know the athletic programs have helped put UM in a national spotlight that others can only wish for. I would like to see increased funding for the fine arts, performing arts and athletics, and less for the law school, unless that law school can work with future and present performers and athletes as a primary end. Of course, that is a pipe dream

Though it doesn't show in my post I too am a fan of the fine arts, particularly theater. I acted in high school and Even had the starring role in a production. I have a friend who does Broadway and another who is a character actor in Hollywood. I recently donated to Missoula Children's Theater. As much as I love both athletics and arts I know people who are bigots on both sides of the "chasm". At the very least each should support their own interests and be neutral about the other. The is plenty of room for both.

 

[Ursa Major]

As a woman who works for an arts organization primarily focused on children . . . AND LOVES FOOTBALL . . . it baffles me how many people have so much misconception and hostility and believe the two "cultures" - for lack of a better descriptor - should be mutually exclusive. The extremists on either 'side" believe that those in the arts are snooty, liberal and elitist; and those who love football are nothing but stupid neanderthals who worship thug athletes and excuse/ignore all personal behavior in favor of the pursuit of excellence on the football field - or gladiator arena if you will. And then there are the reasonable people thank God.

Here is a major difference that I have experienced, however. I find myself defending my passion for football to my artsy friends far more often than I have to defend my belief in the importance of theatre arts to my football friends.

What does that tell you?

GO GRIZ!!

Great post MM! I think we need to identify a spokesperson that can both elegantly and adequately articulate how the supporters of Grizzly Athletics feel about their objections. I can think of no one better to advocate our position than a very special e-Griz poster. I would like to nominate Snap to be our collective voice.

 

[MsMaroon]

No, no, no, you have it all wrong. The arts are graceful, uplifting, and a celebration of what it means to be human. There is simply nothing graceful about a receiver making a one handed catch, pinning the ball to the helmet of the opponent and maintaining control all the way to the ground. And how uplifting could 25000+ jumping to their feet possibly be? You could hardly call living vicariously through the athletic accomplishments of a 20 year old a rational celebration of anything human. Nope, art is for art sake and football is strictly brutal and exploitive and I am sure they could get Tarantino to come support them in the purity of their cause.

Yes, I understand sarcasm. But, most people can walk and whistle at the same time. I am an ardent fan of UM athletics, and most collegiate athletics along with Fine and Performing Arts. Having lived in SoCal for years and now in South Carolina for half a year, I can assure you that the monetary returns from athletics is substantial but, any one with a close look, can see the monetary significance of a well supported Performance Arts curriculum. USC, UCLA, Emerson, Columbia and many more have alumni from the performing arts that contribute heavily to the school, and they enjoy the athletic successes, as well. It takes a very poorly educated person to think one area of education is superior to another. I think, UM has some pretty solid bona fides in Hollywood, now and in the past, that have done much for the U, and I know the athletic programs have helped put UM in a national spotlight that others can only wish for. I would like to see increased funding for the fine arts, performing arts and athletics, and less for the law school, unless that law school can work with future and present performers and athletes as a primary end. Of course, that is a pipe dream

Though it doesn't show in my post I too am a fan of the fine arts, particularly theater. I acted in high school and Even had the starring role in a production. I have a friend who does Broadway and another who is a character actor in Hollywood. I recently donated to Missoula Children's Theater. As much as I love both athletics and arts I know people who are bigots on both sides of the "chasm". At the very least each should support their own interests and be neutral about the other. The is plenty of room for both.

:thumb:

 

[Lakerhater]

Wow! Just amazes me how these pointy head intellectuals think. These are the people who want participation ribbons for kids efforts, without anointing a winner for their efforts. They think free education, food, housing and health care should be free but it's not ever free. The United States is being taken over by an intellectual class who believes in the redistribution of any wealth should be used for the common good of all.

I agree, now if we could just get this ignoramuses to stop watching faux news and think for themselves....

Yo, NEZDannyboy: What the hell does this mean..."faux news" ??? I am positive you're a free thinker while lapping the sewage spewed by MSNBC, right? You twit !!

 

[bgbigdog]

As a woman who works for an arts organization primarily focused on children . . . AND LOVES FOOTBALL . . . it baffles me how many people have so much misconception and hostility and believe the two "cultures" - for lack of a better descriptor - should be mutually exclusive. The extremists on either 'side" believe that those in the arts are snooty, liberal and elitist; and those who love football are nothing but stupid neanderthals who worship thug athletes and excuse/ignore all personal behavior in favor of the pursuit of excellence on the football field - or gladiator arena if you will. And then there are the reasonable people thank God.

Here is a major difference that I have experienced, however. I find myself defending my passion for football to my artsy friends far more often than I have to defend my belief in the importance of theatre arts to my football friends.

What does that tell you?

GO GRIZ!!

It tells you that the "Two Cultures" is not a two-way street. I have extensively studied, and taught, the history of science and technology as it relates to the general "culture." One of my lecture/discussion topics was based on "The Two Cultures" (C. P. Snow, for those who don't know who popularized the term). Creativity in the sciences, or in athletics, is no different from so-called "artistic" creativity -- it is just another feature of human intellect and malleability. But the "intelligensia" have co-opted the term to make it refer only to "the arts" -- which is total BS.

On the other point. Over a half-century of living as an adult, I have personally known over a hundred people with scientific degrees who have exceptional skills in the "arts" -- some are/were absolutely professional level in music, artistic painting, choreography, stage-play writing and direction, movie production, and more. Those were their "hobbies." There are scientific fields where talented and interested "amateurs" can make significant contributions -- astronomy and archaeology come to mind, but there are others. I have met three ... and one of those was married to a degreed scientist. So it's not a level playing field. Technically trained people regularly engage in the arts, often at a high level. "Artsy" people almost never go the other way, and excuse their ignorance by claiming that technical skills don't involve (their versions) of creativity.

Who would have thought that a football fan board would devolve into a discussion of "The Two Cultures." :lol:

Perhaps we could take it a step further and devote time to a Tale of Two Cities. Just a thought.

 

[Umista]

Away we go.
Rich folks should not be allowed to donate.
Global warmed up climate change should dominate E-griz discussion.
Bobby must become the new AD.
U of M must create a course in "Progressive Protesting" and eliminate all sports stuff.
Wall street should not be allowed, for certain not paved.
And finally I must quit and kick myself because I really think the following: # # # question says it all...
Is Bern Sanders, Hill Clinton, Ted Cruise and Don Trump the four leading "humans" the best we can do?
If so then it tells us all we need to know about ourselves.

Football. Spring practice begins soon and I can't wait.

 

[NorthEndZoneDan]

Wow! Just amazes me how these pointy head intellectuals think. These are the people who want participation ribbons for kids efforts, without anointing a winner for their efforts. They think free education, food, housing and health care should be free but it's not ever free. The United States is being taken over by an intellectual class who believes in the redistribution of any wealth should be used for the common good of all.

I agree, now if we could just get this ignoramuses to stop watching faux news and think for themselves....

Yo, NEZDannyboy: What the hell does this mean..."faux news" ??? I am positive you're a free thinker while lapping the sewage spewed by MSNBC, right? You twit !!

sorry for using multi syllables there little man, next time I will type slower for you.

 

[WaGriz4life]

I just hope we have protestors at some point. Nothing like a good protest on campus.

 

[IntuitiveGriz]

Two things:

I think some people read the paragraph that mentioned the Board of Regents and incorrectly assumed their was a public money provision. When there clearly is not. The public has no say in private money donations that are earmarked for a specific purpose/use! To think otherwise is ludicrous. :roll:

And I take issue with the title of the missouilian post: "Are you excited to see the new (privately funded) Champions Center?" While not necessarily a bad leading question, this type of question is going to draw negative responses by nature. People take the time to complain more often than not, it's human nature. The Missoulian knows this, and hence the title. The title was meant to draw the most engagement from it's readers. Marketing 101.

CAN'T WAIT TO SEE THE CHAMPIONS CENTER. so yes, I AM EXCITED! :lol: