From: Arlo J. Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Fri Mar 25 2005 - 14:14:28 GMT
HEADLINE: "What the heck IS wrong with your standards?", Ham asks Arlo.
Ham,
I appreciate your willingness to answer some critical questions. I'm actually
dividing my response into two parts. This one, in celebration of your
refreshing burst of honesty, and the other in repsonse to some of your non-ego
statements.
I am, quite obviously, still seeing much contradiction in your statements that
range from saying overtly "in your opinion", to a stance that your preferences
indicate a higher sensibility and thus promoting yourself as an authority to
determine "degeneracy".
Here is the build-up to Ham's "coup de grace".
> > (1a) Is your position, then, that one must "learn" how to recognize the good
(in music).
>
> Yes.
> > (1b) Since you find The Clash nihilistic, would you say that is because you
have more learned sensibilities than I?
>
> Possibly.
You see why I find your "in your opinion" clarifiers weak.
Presumably, as one becomes more "learned" to recognize the "Quality" in music,
they would become more in-line with "your" sensibilities and preferences? Is
this correct?
So, not to be coy, you are advocating that if everyone became as "learned" as
you, everyone would see that your musical preferences are a higher Quality?
> If everyone liked just what you like, would there be
> > any "degenerate" or "nihilistic" music?
>
> I suspect there would always be an underground market for that sort of
> thing.
Such narcissism, Ham. Really. Your degree and your "connoseurship" really pump
you up with that much ego? (By the way, I too was a radio announcer for many
years, WPSU and T102 FM)
The "sensible" person would answer: If everyone liked what I like, *I* might not
see degeneracy in music, but likely someone else would, because what I find
non-degenerate, someone else may conclude (based on their unique history) is
degenerate.
With you, though, it would eliminate degeneracy altogether, except for enclaves
of underground resistance. Which I can assure you I would gladly and vocally
belong to.
>> And who is seen as a "music connoisseur"? You???
>
> Yes, I think it's possible that a few might see me as speaking with some
> authority on the subject.
I'm sure you could "out talk" me on a host of musicology issues, Ham. Being more
sensible to recognize "higher Quality", however, is something only the "few"
defined as "you and Platt" believe you "have".
And, finally, in absolute finality and no-holds-barred Truth:
> > (13) What's wrong with Ian's standards? Or mine?
> > To restate, why must Ian determine whether or not a particular song as
> > Quality "by the standards [you've] cited". Why not by his own?
>
> That's a good question. What the heck IS wrong with your standards? After
all, you live in the same world that Platt and I do.
Actually, Ham, I think you and Platt are living in your own little world.
This is, quite frankly, the most honest thing I think I've ever seen you or
Platt write. It lacks directness, but it conveys the message.
If only everybody would be more like you, listen to what you like, believe what
you believe, why how much more moral and wonderful the world would be.
What the heck is wrong with me, that I don't have standards "just like you".
We have reached the zenith, boys and girls.
Arlo
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 25 2005 - 14:17:45 GMT