Re: MD Speaking of musical excellence

From: Matt poot (
Date: Thu Feb 12 2004 - 18:06:48 GMT

  • Next message: Matt poot: "MD Attention all forum posters"

    Hello Platt.

    you said: As you know, contemporary geniuses are often overlooked in their
    time,.Van Gogh for example. Allow Pirsig the fullness of time and he will
    be embraced.

    -=*poot*=- So it is written, so let it be done! ;)

    You said: As said, putting Spirit into art is not the issue; communicating
    across the generations to millions is ultimately the standard..

    I say: Well, thats right. But again, using my example of Roger Waters(Pink
    Floyds) 'The Wall', is such a prime example of this. Now, I can only speak
    for myself, and those who I know, who all share a sort of understanding
    about the wall. It touches us all greatly, and I'm positive that it has a
    similar affect on the many millions who have already listened(watched) it.

    Poot:> It is the aim towards quality that makes a difference for me.

    Platt: Aiming towards quality is fine, but for me attainment of quality is

    I say: Well, I would agree with you . To a point however. As I have gone
    through my schooling career, and taken part in many musical events,
    competitions, bands, etc, etc, I have taken on the attitude almost of a
    music teacher. When I see someone who isn't really good, but they are
    trying, I'm happy with that, because, at least they are striving for it.
    However, there are many jackasses (yes, who have an over-abundant supply of
    confidence that they are competent.

    You said:I'm not arguing that Mozart's time produced better music than that
    produced today, although I think a case can be made for that. I am arguing
    that Mozart stands head and shoulders above today's musical composers.

    I say: Well, Yes he does. But Mozart was a musical genius. Even by the
    standard of classical greats, what he accomplished in 32 years of
    simply beyond words. Even compared to Beethoven, or others, he seemed to
    have more potent natural musical ability. Hell, he was composing when he
    was 3!

    But saying this, one cannot expect this to happen in every generation. Here
    is an example, to help me in what I'm trying to communicate here.

    I will use Jedi's as an example, in place of musicians.

    Jedis had been in existence for millenia. In history, there were always
    Jedi Masters who stood out, because they had , naturally, more latent powers
    inside of them than others. Along came Anakin Skywalker (mozart), who
    seemed to be a 'vergence' in the force. This meant that he was basically an
    an extremely, extremely exceptional person with such an amount of capability
    that had never been seen before, or after. This is not to say that it could
    never happen again, but...
    Then look what happened to him....(this isn't really part of my example, but
    just an interesting relation). Anakin turned to the dark side (lets say
    alcoholism , depression,) and lived a short life.

    What was said: > However, I will give you a top pick list of artists I
    either listen to, or
    >have listened to, which I consider to be good; (Current at top) King
    >Crimson Yes Buck-65 ('rap') Pink Floyd RadioHead

    Platt: Are these individuals or groups? How do you rate the Benny Goodman
    against these guys?

    *I omitted Rush, due to a lapse in memory. Although I don't listen to them
    so much now, I used to.

    -=*Poot*=- Well, they're definitely equals. Most of them are groups, with
    the exception of Buck 65. However, it is almost like comparing apples to
    oranges. both are fruit.

    I'm sure others will vouch for Yes and King Crimson, as well as Pink Floyd
    (and Radio Head).

    Yes and King Crimson fall under the category of 'Progressive Rock', and even
    Pink Floyd has been debated to be in this category, but I would put them in
    a category on its own. Especially the guitarists in Yes and King Crimson
    stand above all. They have attained such a mastery of their instrument, as
    to be able to do anything they want with it. It has become an extension of

    I think the main difference being debated here is not of standards of
    quality, but rather the type of art which itself. Even though all of these
    groups are considered musical, there is quite a difference.

    The main difference is the addition of lyrics. The lyrics today are very
    different from those in such "'classical'" compositions such as Erl Konig .
    The Harmonies and Rhythms also have especially a marked difference.

    Concerning Rap: This is a very controversial subject. Being younger, I
    have not only seen, but experienced the difference of Rap in our young
    persons culture. Personally, I do not conisder it music. The
    classification I would prefer to use, would be Word Art. Some of the things
    that these artists do with words, is just astounding! Many of them, can
    basically use words as their instrument. It is not just an easily attained
    skill. You can obviously see the diffference between the "G-Unit" (50 cent,
    pronouced: fiddy- sent), whos vocabulary is probably matched or exceeded by
    a 9 year old, as compared to others , who have excellent knowledge of their
    language, to an extent in which they can basically make things up on the
    spot (known as freestyling) which can be quite amazing.

    What do you think?


    Matthew A. Poot

    P.s. Why are there so many Yes fans on this forum? ...well, I guess its
    their Quality!

    The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*

    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Feb 12 2004 - 18:20:30 GMT