<snip>
> I don't think modern academic music is inherently bad or > wrong, but I do > think that the disconnect between them and any set of > listeners is a measure > of something gone wrong. IMHO, the arts should be an > expression of the > culture of the times. I cannot imagine any of the academic > musicians from, > say, 1950 on, being remembered in 100 years unless they crossed over. > (Well, I'll probably be proven wrong by one exception we > can't pick out > today). However, I'm sure that Beatles' songs will still be > part of the > culture of 2100. Yes. Rock and Roll has seemingly not been lost to new generations, unlike big Band or Symphony music. > > Dan M. > I was thinking today how when rock stars do covers of older generation music, it is quaint, but rarely top chart successful. It is those artists that grab ahold of something different yet familiar that change genres. however, like in academics, the imitators tend to get the big bucks. This leads me to my analysis of problem solving. I will use a method of removing contraints to solve problems. I hypothetically remove a contraint, and see if the original problem can be solved. If so, I then work on the new problem of removing that contraint. Innovation and pure invention is all about the removal of common, sometimes imaginary contraints to create the new. Just like in Music, the best inventions are those that orginate in a different genre/field/boundary. So the answer is... if you want good grades, imitate. If you want to express art, release the contraints. Nerd From Hell
