Re: so cal gig spam--Review of Performance

[jim palmer <jimp@pobox.com>]

what a great thread.

>I have to wonder
>how much of the art Gary saw at the Getty that afternoon went
>unappreciated or misunderstood in the era in which it was made...

(a great point)

and this:
>harsh critique of independant musicians should be handled with care
>I would usually recommend as a course of action giving the artist the 
>benefit of the doubt


on the other hand:
>Bad reviews come with the territory- I have gotten a few.

and:
>...I have a friend who is 
>like this.  He's a great guy, but his headspace is SO buried into 
>freeform/experimental/noise that he gets a little pissy and arrogant 
>if you try to introduce him to more traditional forms


i generally don't like self indulgent art made for the sake of 
nonconformity.
i haven't heard steuart before and i can't say that is what he does.

i distinctly remember a point in college when i realized that george crumb
was the source of the word "crummy" and that schoenberg's "sprechstimme"
was the goofiest sounding thing i had ever heard.
and what about the nasty music contret stuff i had to listen to for music 
history?

i don't really feel so strongly about those guys anymore, and lots of 
very fine musicians have disagreed with me about them.
in fact i have totally changed my mind about some of these things.
this is the nature of music discourse.


finally

>I don't see anything good 
>coming out of sending inflammatory comments to the list

and:
>But why make derogatory and negative opinions public? 
>It serves no useful purpose and it is divisive. 

this discussion is a good thing.
if the original post had not seemed inflammatory,
it might have died a lonely death...

i appreciate when someone really speaks their mind.
it is an opportunity (rarely granted) to know each other
and to grow and learn...

are you guys sure you don't want to talk about gear?