Denis Fodor writes:

>C'mon Steve, it's clear enough what the Received Canon is, except to
>those who are obsessed with doing their own thing.

I'm certainly obsessed with doing my own thing, and I know very well what
the Received Canon is.  A significant aspect of all Received Canons is that
they are traditional and behind the times.

Whenever I read about the Received Canon, four questions come to mind
immediately:

1.  Who creates the Received Canon?
2.  Who distributes the Received Canon?
3.  What connections are there between the Received Canon and the
      musical preferences of an individual?
4.  What advantages accrue to the person who 'accepts' the Received Canon?

This Received Canon is actually just an 'average' of preferences having
nothing to do with the musical taste of one person.  Although I am aware
of the Received Canon, I do not accept it since it does not correspond to
my musical preferences.  In the final analysis, each of us possesses our
own Received Canon, and it likely shifts some over time as well.

Denis appears to throw some negatives at the thought of "those obsessed
with doing their own thing".  Whose thing would I be doing except for my
own? Is there some kind of altruistic element in this which I'm missing?
Just rhetorical questions.

As I have written in past postings, every individual has unique
preferences.  A Received Canon can not possibly address those unique
preferences and therefore is of little or no value to the individual.  But
anyone who is hot to dig into the Received Canon is free to do so.  It's
just the premise that this Canon is the place to start that I find without
merit; where a person starts is best left to that person's particular
tastes.  Finally, musical preferences are subjective areas where Received
Canons hold no worth.

Don Satz
[log in to unmask]