[NewMusic] John Zorn gives out the comps but bans reviews

[lx rudis]

i'd humbly offer that most writing is about the writer first, the subject
second.  by providing raw material for critique, we energize a one-sided or
time-diffuse collaboration.  supposedly this would be for purpose of
alerting strangers [consumers] to our work, and hopefully improving our
approach to our work, but the reality is that we are more like grout used to
fix tiles to a wall, the tiles being the writer's work.  other tilesetters
might appreciate the grout-work, but ultimately it's the tiles which get
attention.

i can say with authority that several of _my_ reviewers are frustrated
novelists, scriptwriters, etc.  they do reviews, but the purpose of those
reviews is both to provide a publisher with examples of skill and to advance
the reviewers' own reputation.

within that span, i have to question [and some may note that i already have
questioned] the purpose of even releasing music, much less music designed
for a 'normal' audience.  if the very system which pretends to give me a
larger audience is nothing more than a tool to advance a different
discipline, then pandering to it places me in a 'victim' role, and instantly
reduces any lasting value in my own work.

in my case, it's an easy transaction:  as a creator in this time and place,
i don't have much penetration or value.   i'm also blessed in that i get to
make stuff and be creative as part of the process which pays my rent, so i
don't have much need to please - i'm not a semi-successful music 'business'
like zorn or trent reznor with a reputation to uphold.  therefore there's
not much risk for me if someone gives me a bad review or three, and as a
result the only logical solution is to rise to the challenge...

the people _i_ worry about are the ones just starting out, who have been
misinformed by their culture about the value of their creativity, and who
have been outright lied to about the economic realities of pursuing a career
in the arts.  it's ok to be a victim if that's what one's plan is, but to be
suckered into it is not good, and imvho should not be rewarded.

so in my opinion, whether he knows it or not, zorn has made a valid
statement.  the documentation machine he's addressing has risen to _their
own challenge_ and revealed that they are not only naked, but hollow inside
as well.

if there was dignity and a thoughtful reaction, it would have been silence,
and zorn would instantly be reduced to utilizing more modern systems to
communicate to 'his' audience.

imvho all i'm seeing here is more of the same - people with deadlines to
meet and rent to be paid, who are desperate for some sort of story or
another and who will instantly and thoughtlessly react to a name who
provides them with something provocative.

ok, that's way too much out of me for today.  sorry if i'm stepping on toes
here, but i felt it important to get this off my chest.  back to resume's
and cover letters with me...





On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 11:48 AM, Sarah - 21 Grand <21grand at 21grand.org>
wrote:

>
> http://www.artsjournal.com/jazzbeyondjazz/2008/03/musicians_dread_words.html
> #more
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bay Area New Music Discussion Group
> NewMusic at music.mills.edu
> http://music.mills.edu/mailman/listinfo/newmusic
>