gtaylor@cornell.UUCP (04/30/84)
My, my...what a change. It seems like only yesterday I was stepping
through everyone's listing of favorite guitarists and bassists. Now,
the mail is composed in large measure of those of a more refined and
us, cultural persuasion coming out of the woodwork about the various
and sundry degrees to which they loathe net.music as it is and long
for a homeland of their own. The issue must be serious, as it has
occaisioned Michael Ellis to dip into the deep well of visceral language
for his closing retort.
In the firestorm which is surely to follow, I would hope that the
essential thrust of his argument is not lost (not uncommon when
everyone resorts to the old Ad Hominem as a first option). Are
the classical types ( I find myself in an odd position here in
this categorizing, since I suppose that I am one of them myself-
besides being an ethnomusician, electronic composer, and music
critic (everything from MDC to Ultravox to Codona)) being a
pack of cultural elitists in their clamour? More than that, when
their island is finally settled, will they start sending
CHarles Dodge and Elliot Carter fans away on a leaky raft
(I presume David Del Tredici, the "new" Penderetski (sp?), and
a few others constitute the new orthodoxy)? Is M. Ellis' loyalty
to Scriabin going to be trotted out as corrolary evidence of his
aberrant behaviour as a "classicist?"
I am not going to say that every terminal jockey on the net has
taken great pains to provide a thorough and judicious critique
of music and musical styles that you Baroque fans are unfamiliar
with: that would be plain stupid. You will note, however, that
not a few people recently have taken some pains to suggest again
that that should be done. I applaud the suggestion. I would like to
point out that there are generally two contending styles on this
net: One is the "exposure by invitation" school. People post
notes and articles about people whose music they appreciate with
the intent of either communicating with like minded sorts or
to suggest the artist or musician as a possibility. With the exception
of Karl Malik and perhaps a few others (I even got into it by
virtue of being beseiged for recommendations of gamelan albums
after I mentioned that I knew a little about them: this incident
alone should suggest to you that there may be people out there who
are VERY interested in much more than what is discussed here , but
simply don't know who to ask. By dividing music, we are not merely
doing the sort of thing you do when you create a LISP and a FORTH
group: we are segregating the notion of what constitues music in
a way that I feel is undesireable.
The second type of net posting is the "critic as adversary" school.
It is dominated by both statements of opinion weighted with the
language of objective judgements ("Any educated ear should find
Glenn Gould's singing along with his pyrotechnic piano stylings
patently offensive...." "Well, it seems that an excess of mind-altering
drugs has finally caused Rush's collective lyric-writing brain to
fall through the floor, rendering their usual sophomoric drivel
merely uncomprehensible...."). You get plenty of that, and I'd be
quick to point out that my "n" finger gets tired of that as well. I
suggest that the formation of a classical group will only spare the
classicists guitar rants, but give them all "who does a good Brahms?"
rants instead. The very notion of forming a "classical" section
smacks of that very sort of "adversary" position. Prune away
the usual Rosenish deadwood, and you've got a very good question:
Why haven't you people posted any classical stuff????
John Opalko's point about organ voicing irks me a bit as well. Did
it occur to John that a discussion of how much "chiff" to put on
an organ pipe might be of considerable use to those of us who do
electronic music? His very choice of subject matter seemed calculated
to be elitist (thank you, Gerry LeCompte (wherever you are) for
teaching me about organs) in the worst way: It divides the knowers
from the unknowers without providing any bridges to understanding.
Quite a bit of the recent discussion of tempered and just intonation
on the net have also been of great help to me as well.
This is getting a bit long, isn't it? I hope you get my drift here.
Eclecticism is a virtue on this net, and I'm against anything that
"solves" differences by dividing (especially when the dividers seem
more interesting in dividing than they ever were in contributing).
Also, how come "classical" music would appear to the traveller from
space to be White, Racist, Sexist, and an aberration of the "Western
Mind?" (No objectionable language here, now ANSWER THE QUESTION.)
gtaylor(could you put on the Eskimo throat singing after the Mahler
is finished? We just played the Captain Beefheart....)@cornellrlr@pyuxn.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (04/30/84)
Please read the parent article to this one (7886@cornell.UUCP) by cornell!gtaylor. He really says a lot and asks a lot of serious questions that merit looking at, if not answering. Thank you. -- "I'm not dead yet!" "Oh, don't be such a baby!" Rich Rosen pyuxn!rlr