[NewMusic] (no subject)

[Ron Lettuce]

Sorry (I did happen to write 4 of the last 6 list emails....), I'm not working on Sibelius...I'm crotchety (and impatient) because I'm playing (Standard Classical) piano after 18 years of playing Rock Keybords...

I sometimes feel like what I do on this list (besides making STUPID jokes) is to voice an OPINION contrary to the ~Alternative (read normal BANEWMUS)~ opinion...which sometimes is sort of like standing up for the KKK and thier right to free speech, I don't believe in what they say, I totally believe that they have a right ot say it, no matter how offensive it is...BEAT ME UP ALL YOU WANT...I'm just a dude with an EMAIL ADDRESS....

For the most part, I do this because of dissent I get from people who "COULD" potentially extend our scene, but are really turned off by it because of the pretentiousness, etc...and BELIEVE ME...I ( well maybe not me, cause I'm not playing out right now...)...along with the majority of this list would stand to benefit if more of the public would go to their shows...

lettuce


----- Original Message ----
From: Ava Mendoza <ava.mendoza at gmail.com>
To: Bay Area New Music Discussion Group <newmusic at music.mills.edu>
Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 1:40:57 AM
Subject: Re: [NewMusic] (no subject)

matt said:
> > Well, the people who dislike experimental music are right. The bulk
> > of the work that gets heard by non-new-music-specialists could fall
> > under the umbrella of overly-intellectual/dissonant/heartless sort of
> > stuff.
> so weasel said:
> so apparently "non-new-music-specialists" have a problem with 1)
> intellect in music (how much is too much?) 2) levels of dissonance beyond
> what, basic diatonicism? and 3) emotions they can't personally identify?
>
so i say;
i think the things that matt listed next in his email--
process-oriented music, plunderphonics, over-concern with technique or
with very specialized technique, etc, are what he was saying non-new
music specialists have a problem with. not with intellect in music in
general, or with dissonance.

as far as i can see the fact is that there is actually a reasonable
amount of experimental music that is admittedely not really concerned
with emotion, and i agree with matt that a lot of process oriented
music and plunderphonics falls into this category. getting emotional
about a lot of cage's music seems ridiculous (although i think i've
managed it a few times). a direct emotional connection to
Negativeland's music seems like an equally retarded idea.. at least
from the stuff i've heard.

weasel also said:
> "grown beyond it". ugh, my vomit-ometer is going off again. what in the
>world are you doing here if you're such a salt-of-the-earth musical
>populist!!!?

not to continue the definition-slinging, but i don't really see why
"populism" can't coexist with making bizarre music. i'll go out on a
limb and say populism is a concern with "ordinary" people, a certain
amount of faith in these people, and artistically a certain desire to
reach them. there's no reason why you can't make really unusual music
while at the same time having a desire to communicate
emotionally/viscerallly to a wide, non-musically-specialized group of
people. off the top of my head albert ayler and keiji haino stand out
as musicians whose music was/is truly bizarre but who also really
valued/value being able to move people regardless of their
intellectual/musical background. to me part of the point of
non-genre-specific music is that it has a certain communicative power
that can hopefully go beyond cultural background.


ps. is everyone getting so heated about this cause they are crotchety
from staying up alone on friday night fighting with sibelius like me??
_______________________________________________
Bay Area New Music Discussion Group
NewMusic at music.mills.edu
http://music.mills.edu/mailman/listinfo/newmusic