> > Sorry, way of judging music by it's ethnic > > background and complexity is > > absurd.
Chris said, > Let's follow your reasoning... > > Great! Then I'm just as good a player as Paul > O'Dette! There may be some who would prefer your playing to Paul's, So for them you're better. >Who cares if he plays cleaner, has a finer > touch, etc? Louis Armstrong was criticised by some for continuing to play after his technical abilities began to decline. Wynton Marsalis' response was, "Nuance is the epitome of technique." >I'm after different goals (largely I am) > so we can't possibly say that either of us is > "better," can we? And that's the way it should be. The music's the thing not the player. > 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. Wynton Marsalis also said, "The message of rap seems to be, 'I used to be a thug, but now I'm a musician.'" >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. Cage also said that a garbage truck rolling down the street is music if you have the ears to hear it, but that doesn't mean I want to learn how to drive a garbage truck so I can make some music. > > 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. Good for what? > > 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 beg to differ. Generally what we think is "better" is what we like and vice versa. >I will concede, for example, that John > Coltrane probably produced "better" music than Led > Zeppelin, but I personally prefer Zep most of the > time. You prefer inferior music? Understand, I'm not saying Led Zeppelin's music is inferior to John Coltrane's. You are. I'm sure John Coltrane's version of Led Zeppelin would still be John Coltrane and Led Zeppelin's version of John Coltrane would still be Led Zeppelin. >But then I prefer Dowland to Zeppelin. Had me worried there for a minute. All the Best, Gary > > 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 > > > > -- > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.428 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/478 - Release Date: 10/17/2006 10:45 AM > >
