[net.music] net.music.* groups

daemon@decwrl.UUCP (02/07/84)

From: akov68::boyajian


	I certainly favor the elimination of net.records and the formation of
music subgroups, with one suggestion:

	I may be burned as a heretic for suggesting this, but maybe some of these
hurt feelings of the part of jazz, blues, or folk music lovers could be soothed
by having the non-classical subgroup be called net.music.popular. I know that
"pop" has negative connotations for a lot of music lovers, but looking at it
objectively, "popular" *is* a good generic term. I have at least one friend who
abhors "classical" used as a generic term for "longhair" [boy, is that an obsolete
term!] music, seeing how it is a specific style of music (exemplified by Mozart).
Strictly speaking, baroque, romantic, etc. music is *not* classical, yet it is
called such.

N.B. Please don't interpret the comment about soothing the hurt feelings of
jazz, blues, and folk fans as being patronizing --- I enjoy all of those genres
of music, as well as rock and classical.


				  --- jayembee
				      (Jerry Boyajian, DEC Maynard)
				UUCP: (decvax!decwrl!rhea!akov68!boyajian)
				ARPA: (decwrl!rhea!akov68!boyajian@Shasta)

rlr@pyuxn.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (02/08/84)

Aha!  Now we have the ultimate subgrouping.  Put all serious music in
net.music.classical, and jazz, blues, folk, etc. [?????] can go into
net.music.popular, which of course is not being patronizing or elitist...

Of course, classical is a misnomer, so we'll have to change the name to
net.music.serious.  So now all we have left to do is distinguish which
musics belong in which groups:

	Van Halen -- net.music.serious:  They're like artists, man, and
			anybody who gets compared to Steve Howe...

	Leonard Bernstein -- net.music.popular:  Hey, he wrote movie
			soundtracks and scores for musicals, and he
			wrote a rock opera.  He never could conduct anyway...

	Rick Wakeman -- net.music.serious:  All the music he stole from
				was serious...

	Grateful Dead -- net.music.serious:  Anybody who can stand up there
				and play what they play for as long as they
				do have GOT to be serious...

	Ludwig van Beethoven -- net.music.popular:  Everybody knows who he
				is, and what about A Fifth of Beethoven???

Further pigeonholing exercises are left to the reader.

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUBGROUPS FOR NEW TOPICS AND SUBGROUPS BASED
ON TASTE!!!!!!
-- 
Pardon me for breathing...
	Rich Rosen    pyuxn!rlr

pking@denelcor.UUCP (P. King) (02/09/84)

	I tend to agree with Jerry's suggestion.  However,
	I feel that the names of the subgroups should be
	net.music.popular and net.music.unpopular.  This
	would allow maximum freedom for the submittors to
	determine their target subgroup, or perhaps they
	could submit their articles to both (just to be on
	the safe side).  As a guideline, I would tend to
	include Mozart and The Beatles in the "popular"
	subgroup, and include Cage, Stockhausen (sp?) and
	Whitehouse in "unpopular".

			P.King  (...!hao!denelcor!pking)