Why is it that everything "BACK THEN" was better?

[DonTaseMeBrah]

It seems interesting & awfully weird to me that everything back then was always considered better than now or in modern times.

Everything back then is held in such higher regard & reverence than things that happend in recent time.


Musical Composers like Mozart, Beethoven, Bach. It seems like they are the only ones capable of making great musical masterpieces that stand the test of time.

Scientist like Einstein & Benjamin Franklin are so highly thought of.

Great artists like Rembrandt, Da Vinci, & Michaelangelo, Monet...

How come no artist, scientists, & musical composers in recent times get the same status, standing, or reverence as these guys. Is Rembrandt so talented that he's the only one that can paint a picture?

Then when you look at sports, specifically boxing, Its the same thing. Nobody seems worthy to even come close to the old fighters & god forbid there is a fighter from the 90s & up to come close to top 20 discussion ....

I think i know the reason why people think artists, musicians, political leaders, actresses, & BOXERS of the olden days are considered much better & can never be surpassed.....


Its to preserve culture.

Its to preserve history.


How come its so hard for modern athletes, artists, musicians, scientists etc. to get the same type of recognition as a mozart, beethoven, rembrandt, ray robinson, armstrong & einstein?

Its not that they are the better musical composers, the better scientist, the better boxers, better artists, but its the fact that they want to guard their time, their accomplishments, their heroes from being forgotten or replaced by a better one.


I can find a painting by a artists from the 90s & up that is visually stunning, complex, & deeper than a painting from a great artists in the 1700s but nobody would care about it because some guy in brooklyn painted it in 2001. Why is that?

Im not saying that we during this time are better.

What im saying is that what they did in the olden days is not impossible & that ITS OKAY TO RATE & JUDGE artists, scientists, & BOXERS as equal or if its warranted BETTER THAN back then.

[Left Hook Tua]

heavyweights 10 years ago were better than now.

[talip bin osman]

honestly now man... u really think oasis or radiohead are much better than the beatles?

or are there any reggae bands out there today who can claim they are much better than bob marley & the wailers?

u think cotto can beat palomino? or cuevas perhaps?

do u honestly think naito or kameda can beat carbajal?

[Southpaw Stinger]

It just was. The beer I had yesterday was nicer than the one today.

[THRILLA77]

atipan ng pawid ng tangang tanong.....

[GJC]

Interesting question this.
I think re artists and painters it is worth noting that a lot of these guys never had much success in their day, Van Gogh I don't think sold a picture. Also not being a hit parade as such or painters painting for patrons their work maybe didn't get the wide appreciation at the time it got subsequently. Re music I think artists get an initial huge success then there is almost a backlash against them and then 20 years later their music get appreciated, maybe you need to take a step back? Re painters/artists I think a lot of the high profile ones these days are the ones doing sharks in perspex or un made beds so maybe the talented ones are getting a little missed. That said I'm 70 and probably not his target audience but I think Banksy is very talented and it is an interesting way of presenting works of art. As for music I often hear new music I like very much.
Science, there have been tremendous strides in my lifetime, diseases such as polio and TB have been tackled. Plastic which wasn't main stream when I was a child impresses the devil out of me as do computers and the fact I can have a conversation with someone 1000's of miles away. Maybe people who grew up with these advances take them for granted.
Re boxers I think you can only really critique a boxer when his career is finished and whereas there maybe 30 fighters now that have very vocal fans saying they are the best ever. in truth only 2 or 3 will stand the test of time and be talked about in the same breath as a SRR, Duran, Pep etc. My top 20 p4p list covers 100 years with a pretty even spread.
Guess the thing is to enjoy and appreciate the time you are in and remember nostalgia ain't what it used to be

[Sugarj]

Very wise post GJC, not unsuprising as you gave away your age. Hee hee

There is no two ways about it, we are living in a world where many things are so much better than they were decades ago, cars, computers, aircraft, communications. The Olympics show us the great improvements in human performance over the decades and technological leaps are clear.

When it comes to nostalgia however, I suppose this really can relate to stand out individuals or pioneers of the time. Judged against their contempories the great figures of history proved special and I have no doubt that some may have been sucessful in similar mediums today. If Bach or Mozart were born in recent times they may well have proved to be wizards of the electric guitar or movie soundtrack composers, who knows? If Einstein had a quad core PC he may have gone down different avenues than relativity, I wouldn't have sold him a DeLoren!!! If Van Gogh had today's narcotics he may well have cut off more than his ear!!!

There is alot of magnificence in classical art and music and there are many geniuses of these mediums today. Joe Satriani, Steve Vai and even Banksy will no doubt be fondly remembered in time too. Just imagine what the people would have done to Da Vinci if he had painted a 'Magic Eye' stereogram, he'd have probably been branded a heretic and suffered a rough fate.

Bringing it back to boxing though we do have a vast library of fight films since the turn of last century that clearly show decade by decade the evolution of the sport as well the the protagonists. The further back we go, the quality of the films deteriorates, but honestly from the mid 30s onwards there is some superb footage and we can judge the fighters we see in comparison to today's fighters. There are however, standout individuals who are quite simply that spectacular that they do transgress their era and were so ahead of their time that they are impossible to ignore. Some guys really were that good. There are modern greats too every bit as special, I have no doubt that Roy Jones, Floyd Mayweather and Ray Leonard will be fondly remembered in years to come.

[GJC]

If Bach or Mozart were born in recent times they may well have proved to be wizards of the electric guitar or movie soundtrack composers, who knows? If Einstein had a quad core PC he may have gone down different avenues than relativity, I wouldn't have sold him a DeLoren!!! If Van Gogh had today's narcotics he may well have cut off more than his ear!!!

Think this is a good point and put far more eloquantly than what I was trying to say with Banksy. Maybe another example would be the poets of yesterday and musicians such as Bob Dylan in the 60's and Eminem nowadays. They have a message to say and they use the medium of the day to get that to as wide an audience as they can. Who is to say Eminem wouldn't have been a renowned poet in years past?

[Lord Finesse]

I don't really think like that.

Boxers like Mayweather Jr., Pacquiao, Jones Jr. and Hopkins are all-time greats, or at least close to that, in my opinion.

The weird thing is that the old fighters just accomplished more by the end of their career than any of the modern ones. That plays a big factor in how to rate them on an all-time basis.

If you're talking about boxing and athletic wise without rating them, then you can make a very good argument that the fighters nowadays are better. I don't know about you, but I can't think of many boxers who can beat a prime Roy Jones.

By the end of their career, maybe they'll be recognized more than they are now.

[GJC]

I don't really think like that.

Boxers like Mayweather Jr., Pacquiao, Jones Jr. and Hopkins are all-time greats, or at least close to that, in my opinion.

The weird thing is that the old fighters just accomplished more by the end of their career than any of the modern ones. That plays a big factor in how to rate them on an all-time basis.

If you're talking about boxing and athletic wise without rating them, then you can make a very good argument that the fighters nowadays are better. I don't know about you, but I can't think of many boxers who can beat a prime Roy Jones.

By the end of their career, maybe they'll be recognized more than they are now.

I don't really think about fighters as to how they rank in all time until their careers are done although Jones Jnr is in my top 20 list now as IMO he is pretty much done.
If Pacquiao beats Mayweather he will certainly crack my top 20 when he is done although then I have the worry on who to drop!
All 4 names you say should rank in p4p lists somewhere by the end of their careers, just a matter of where.
As to the old v new arguments they are as ever ongoing.....