rlr@pyuxn.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (05/09/84)
I have a few questions, now that there appears to be a classical-only music newsgroup, that I would like to ask the readership of this newsgroup. This is a very serious survey, and I hope that you will treat it that way. I will make an attempt to consolidate whatever responses I do get. Part of the reason behind this is to gain insight into the motivations for newsgroup separatism. 1) Why was there a need for a separate subgroup? 2) Why was it impossible to submit articles to the parent group? 3) If "hostility of other submitters in the parent group" was a factor in 1) or 2), please give specific examples. Were articles that were submitted to net.music somehow shouted down, harrassed, etc. in some way. Did you see any of those articles? 4) If "too many articles I was not interested in" was a factor in 1) or 2), then please answer the following: a. Why does your particular taste warrant its own subgroup as opposed to the other tastes? What about the fact that even those who have other tastes must do a significant amount of 'n'-ing in the parent group? b. Are you doing a significant amount of 'n'-ing in net.music.classical, or are you reading all the articles that come through? If your taste is not adequately represented percentage-wise within net.music.classical, would you then propose a NEW subgroup for it? Why or why not? c. Have you ever been exposed to other musics in a serious way? If so, what about these other musics makes you want not to listen to them or to read about them? If not, why not? 5) Do you consider your musical tastes limited or expansive? Do you find any of the topics in net.music.classical uninteresting? If so, does this mean that you would unsubscribe if discussion of these topics dominated the group at some point? If not, does this mean that you read and enjoy everything that appears in net.music.classical? -- Never ASSUME, because when you ASSUME, you make an ASS out of U and ME... Rich Rosen pyuxn!rlr
bae@fisher.UUCP (The Master of Sinanju) (05/10/84)
The man just does not want to let the issue die!
--
Brian A. Ehrmantraut
{ihnp4, decvax, ucbvax}!allegra!fisher!baespoo@utcsrgv.UUCP (Suk Lee) (05/10/84)
<>
WHAT is Mr. Rosen's preoccupation with
the existence of this newsgroup? So
it's a subgroup of net.music. So what?
Other newsgroups have subgroups that
haven't aroused this amount of
hostility. As someone who reads
net.music.classical, I would publicly
invite Mr. Rosen, to accept its
existence and use it (or not).
--
From the pooped paws of:
Suk Lee
..!{decvax,linus,allegra,ihnp4}!utcsrgv!spoodavid@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) (05/10/84)
You don't have to be a Statistician to recognize a slanted survey. As Burt Lance said, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"; this group is working. Finally, why label this group as secessionist? Why not net.sport.hoops or net.rec.bridge? And is there a reason other than historical accident that net.music wasn't itself labeled net.arts.music, and thus open to criticism for isolating itself from other arts? Why is this specialization more sinister than others? David Rubin allegra!fisher!david
linda@inuxd.UUCP (Linda Pearlstein) (05/10/84)
Excuse me for not sending mail directly to Rosen -- since I've never submitted to net.music.classical, perhaps I can be forgiven for taking this space. I feel so passionately about classical music, and I love reading everyone's comments so much, I'd like to express my support of net.music.classical in terms possibly different from those previously expressed. These terms are the purely *aesthetic*. When Rosen asks why I think there's a "need" for a separate group, the answer involves how I *feel* when I hear classical music versus how I feel when I hear rock (and other) music. To me, classical music represents some of the highest achievements of the human spirit. When I am appalled and demoralized by the enormous cruelty human beings inflict on one another, music provides the best antidote to my despair. It reminds me of the heights that humankind can achieve. I feel an emotional and -- with Bach, for example -- even an intellectual excitement at what I hear. The pleasure is multiple, of course, when a great composition is performed with brilliance and intensity by a great artist. Rosen asks if I have been exposed to other music. Yes. My son (a college freshman with an ENORMOUS collection of -- and enthusiasm for -- rock music as well as a significant background in classical violin) assures me that I am missing a significant aspect of 20th century culture -- even literature. He claims that rock music at its best contains worthwhile poetry. I try to listen sometimes (for his sake), and occasionally I find some pleasure -- at least in the beat. But I insist to you that on this aesthetic level I'm trying to tell you about, I derive only a tiny fraction of the pleasure from rock music that I do, and have for years, from classical. There doesn't seem to be much I can do about this. Why should I HAVE to? Rosen asks if I consider my musical tastes limited. HE would. I'm not sure about others. I like several centuries worth of music, from early Monteverdi to late Mahler. I love big -- Verdi's Requiem, Bach's B Minor Mass -- and little -- teeny chamber works: trios, violin sonatas. I DO dislike "light" music -- waltzes, operettas -- the Boston Pops level of music does not appeal. I didn't feel hostility from the rest of the net.music group, to respond to another of Rosen's questions. Indeed, I know that my son would enjoy reading net.music for its informed discussion of the music he loves. I didn't feel hostility -- I just felt a tired "n" finger. I make no claims that other subgroups are not needed, and I wouldn't oppose them. One wonderful aspect of net.music.classical is to discover the many levels on which others appreciate classical. I am learning SO much that I didn't know, and learning to listen for nuances I hadn't heard, thanks to the .classical contributors. My bottom line, Mr. Rosen, is that I feel on the same "wavelength" with the contributors to net.music.classical. I feel no such communion with most of those on net.music. Why should I HAVE to? And my bottom bottom line is -- look at the number of contributions to this net. group in its brief life. What principle concerning subgroups is being violated when this group has been met with such enthusiasm? Linda Pearlstein AT&T Consumer Products Indianapolis 317 845-3691 ..ihnp4!inuxc!inuxd!linda
rlr@pyuxn.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (05/11/84)
[REMEMBER, *I'M* WITH THOSE OF YOU WHO WANT THIS DISCUSSION MOVED TO PRIVATE MAIL; THERE ARE THOSE OUT THERE WHO ARE CONTINUALLY POSTING ADDITIONAL ITEMS ON THIS TOPIC...] >If you wish to contribute articles about classical music, feel free to join us, >else let us enjoy each others contributions. Don't worry about being left >out - just add 'net.music.classical' to your subscription list. Already have, thank you. My complaint is not MY being left out but rather YOUR excluding yourselves from the mainstream of net.music. The newsgroup loses its diversity of contributors if one group chooses to isolate themselves. > The problem with net music - like many such groups is that > it is too broad for those of us with more specialized tastes. This is why > net.auto is divided into sub-groups for different makes & models of cars. Which net do you subscribe to? I've never seen any such subgrouping. (Of course, Piscataway is known to be a bit behind in terms of the net...) For those who ask "why is it OK to have subgroups of net.micro, et al, but not net.music?" I never said I liked that idea either, but that was established long before I joined the net. I am complaining about the resulting loss of net diversity that subgrouping proposes, NOT about people's rights to read (and write) what they choose. Frankly, I don't see how having one group infringes those rights. Please tell me how!!!! (i.e., by answering the survey I posted [which asks those questions directly] instead of making rude comments about it in this newsgroup or mailing me notes that say "Rather than answer your survey, let me say that I think that net.music.classical is a good idea, and I don't know why you're complaining about it.") > Although my musical tastes are fairly broad (including classical, folk, > country, and some jazz), I DON'T subscribe to net.music, since I don't feel > like 'n'ing' past all the Top 40 rock articles. One of the questions I ask in the survey is "Do you realize that everybody who subscribes to any newsgroup has to 'n' past a whole bunch of articles that they don't like?" Are all newsgroups going to be divided up so that everyone will like all the articles in each subgroup, or are we going to have a network where diverse groups of people with different tastes share and pool resources? To me, this is a fundamental question, so please don't answer with "C'mon Rich, you don't think that one little subgroup is going to..." -- "So, it was all a dream!" --Mr. Pither "No, dear, this is the dream; you're still in the cell." --his mother Rich Rosen pyuxn!rlr
rjb@akgua.UUCP (R.J. Brown [Bob]) (05/11/84)
David,
That's Bert Lance....
And smile when you say Bank Examiner!
Bob Brown {...clyde!akgua!rjb}
AT&T Technologies, Inc.............. Norcross, Ga
(404) 447-3784 ... Cornet 583-3784