--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Sorry, way of judging music by it's ethnic > background and complexity is > absurd.
Let's follow your reasoning... Great! Then I'm just as good a player as Paul O'Dette! Who cares if he plays cleaner, has a finer touch, etc? I'm after different goals (largely I am) so we can't possibly say that either of us is "better," can we? As a matter of fact, then, all non-musicians are inherently better players than any of us since they are not clouded by the complexities that we must confront in learning an instrument. As John Cage might argue, they can make their music directly by vocal utterances, feet stamping, and driving cars. That's just as good as Bach, afterall. Seriously, the absurdity lies in saying that since we often times can't seperate the music from its historical/cultural/social contexts there's no use in making any distinction. This like saying that my house is just as good as the Duomo in Florence. This is not an open invitation to rate each and every piece of music, however! Note that this has nothing at all to do with likes and dislikes. (I personally would not like to live in the Duomo.) I will concede, for example, that John Coltrane probably produced "better" music than Led Zeppelin, but I personally prefer Zep most of the time. But then I prefer Dowland to Zeppelin... Chris __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
