Karl Miller:

> It seems to me that we can value a painting, or a play, or a movie that
> might disturb us, and perhaps give us pause to reflect on something
> unpleasant.  Yet, why is it that we, collectively speaking, seem to
> reject the notion that music can have the same impact and that music
> that stretches our ears be considered worthy of our time.  Perhaps it
> is that notion that music is passively consumed?  Other thoughts?

I disagree that music is alone.  Serious lit, film (if it hasn't got
explosions and car chases), and art are also subject to the criterion
of enjoyment.  I'm talking about new art, not art with a well-known
signature.  Thomas Pyncheon, a great writer, sells, but he has name
recognition and sells not as much as James Patterson, but more than
Martha McFerrin.

Steve Schwartz

             ***********************************************
The CLASSICAL mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned LISTSERV(R)
list management software together with L-Soft's HDMail High Deliverability
Mailer for reliable, lightning fast mail delivery.  For more information,
go to:  http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html