It is true, Martyn. However the "Salieri syndrome" is real thing. Fortunately 
the modern technology can temper it a great deal, with crowd funding etc.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 27, 2015, at 7:08 AM, Martyn Hodgson <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>   Putting my own head above the parapet: this is an entertaining
>   discussion but, as has already been pointed out, a bit light on actual
>   facts. Simple assertion, however personally heartfelt, is really not
>   the same as proof.
>   Cultivating good contacts is clearly important in obtaining engagements
>   and such marketing approaches ought not to be scorned as, say, being
>   below one's dignity as a great artiste. Concert promoters (and
>   recording companies) will often, understandably, tend to favour tried
>   and tested performers but to have mixed feelings about engaging someone
>   with a limited personal artistic following and who might be seen as
>   difficult.  Indeed, what seems to be rather overlooked by some is that
>   most promoters generally engage on the level of artistic following
>   amongst potential customers and, putting it bluntly, if a performer
>   hasn't established a decent reputation amongst wider audiences (and
>   review critics) they are less likely to be engaged - despite their own
>   evaluation of their personal merits or of being 'victims' of unnamed
>   'groups' bent on excluding them.
>   Of course, if you're not already highly celebrated, in the first
>   instance you'll stand more chance of being engaged at a small local
>   community Arts centre/festival than at a large international concert
>   hall - but expect a more modest fee.......    And don't turn your nose
>   up at jobbing work such as continuo, song accompaniment and the like.
>   MH
> 
>   From: howard posner <[email protected]>
>   To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>   Sent: Friday, 27 February 2015, 2:59
>   Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute in the Future again
>   On Feb 26, 2015, at 1:33 PM, Christopher Wilke
>   <[1][email protected]> wrote:
>> Howard,
>> 
>> I'll be frank. You are having way too much fun tearing apart the
>   sincere, heartfelt confessions of musicians who - quite unlike yourself
>   - are struggling to simultaneously make a living and art in a difficult
>   environment. I could counter-refute your semantics, but I don't think
>   that would be productive as I suspect that you're really more
>   interested in playing "gotcha" logic games than advancing the
>   discourse.
>> 
>> You are free to disagree and contribute to the discussion in a
>   constructive way, of course. I would ask, however, that you consider
>   replying a bit more respectfully to those of us down in the trenches to
>   whom topic is a more personal one than it will be to someone such as
>   yourself who holds no real stake in the matter.
>> 
>> Chris
>   OK.  I've waited a few hours and taken a lot of deep breaths, so this
>   is me being calm.
>   Danny wrote that he did not understand statements that unnamed
>   organizations were doing unstated things that benefitted some unnamed
>   persons and harmed other unnamed persons.  Since any such statement,
>   however "heartfelt" or however deep in the trenches it originates, is
>   devoid of information and thus meaningless for any practical purpose,
>   his remark was so obviously self-evident that I wonder why he even
>   wasted the 30 seconds it took to type it.
>   You responded by calling him a liar.
>   This was beneath scorn, and certainly beneath you, and I think my
>   response was measured, inasmuch as I chose to explain the substance
>   (actually the lack of it) and ignore the personal attack on Danny.  I
>   have no idea why you thought you could get into a credibility contest
>   with someone who has never made an ill-considered remark in all the
>   years he's been in the lute community, but you are way out of line.
>   You should refrain from talking about  "respect" until you've
>   apologized to him.
>   And don't even get me started on "if one were make such statements,
>   they would represent an inappropriately dismissive response to the
>   issues under discussion."
>   You need to take a step back.
>   To get on or off this list see list information at
>   [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> 
>   --
> 
> References
> 
>   1. mailto:[email protected]
>   2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> 


Reply via email to