Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
just responding partially to: spgoodman@earthlight.net writes: >I don't think the term "out" that we're talking about has anything to do >with "outsiders" in this sense. "Out" has to do with whether something >is no longer being designated by (often self-appointed) critics as "hip", >"cool", or otherwise interesting to them - this is definitely *not* my understanding of the term 'out', at least insofar as its regular useage in the vernacular of the community in which i participate. my understanding of the term might loosely define it thusly: 'out'side the norm (eg, playing 'outside the ordained changes', from the 'jazz/post-jazz' community), as in the commonly used phrase: 'that shit was *out*!' add'ly, my comprehension of the word also falls within a context more akin to whatall's been termed 'outsider art'..... also: are not *all* critics ---including you, me, et al--- self-appointed, somehow? >and since such people always >have some claim to the pulse of the public, we should all bow down, admit >how right they are, and follow their "hip" example/instructions. >Bullocks! > Bolshoi! (expletive debated but deleted) i agree, sorta/kinda: though i think it can be aesthetically 'enlightening', somehow, to allow oneself to weigh *all* kindsa folks' opinions on things 'artistic', esp. when they don't agree w/one's own; hmmmm..... i don't think it's necessary that such considerations oughta threaten one's personal 'artistic' directions, but, rather, that attitude may enrich/broaden one's perspective..... even when one's basic/initial reaction is severe, as in 'anger', 'bitterness', 'fear'..... but, whatever..... all digressions..... all incorporated into music, into looping..... best, dt / S-C
- To: spgoodman@earthlight.net
- From: Hedewa7@aol.com
- Subject: OT: very: Re: "out" is out itself
- Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 11:12:13 EST
just responding partially to: spgoodman@earthlight.net writes: >I don't think the term "out" that we're talking about has anything to do >with "outsiders" in this sense. "Out" has to do with whether something >is no longer being designated by (often self-appointed) critics as "hip", >"cool", or otherwise interesting to them - this is definitely *not* my understanding of the term 'out', at least insofar as its regular useage in the vernacular of the community in which i participate. my understanding of the term might loosely define it thusly: 'out'side the norm (eg, playing 'outside the ordained changes', from the 'jazz/post-jazz' community), as in the commonly used phrase: 'that shit was *out*!' add'ly, my comprehension of the word also falls within a context more akin to whatall's been termed 'outsider art'..... also: are not *all* critics ---including you, me, et al--- self-appointed, somehow? >and since such people always >have some claim to the pulse of the public, we should all bow down, admit >how right they are, and follow their "hip" example/instructions. >Bullocks! > Bolshoi! (expletive debated but deleted) i agree, sorta/kinda: though i think it can be aesthetically 'enlightening', somehow, to allow oneself to weigh *all* kindsa folks' opinions on things 'artistic', esp. when they don't agree w/one's own; hmmmm..... i don't think it's necessary that such considerations oughta threaten one's personal 'artistic' directions, but, rather, that attitude may enrich/broaden one's perspective..... even when one's basic/initial reaction is severe, as in 'anger', 'bitterness', 'fear'..... but, whatever..... all digressions..... all incorporated into music, into looping..... best, dt / S-C