"Leighton M. Gill" wrote:

>Yes, let us not strive toward excellence, but, instead, aspire to be
>fair-to-middling.  If we set a goal that is too difficult, instead of
>making ourselves better in order to achieve it, let's just give up because,
>if it's too hard, it probably isn't worth it.
>
>I have no interest in following this one all that closely, but, my God,
>this one was so patently ludicrous that I couldn't let it pass.

What is "Music of our times" but a desire to allow mediocrity to pass as
important? What is "accessible" but a paean to pedestrianism?

And yet oen can divide the two most vocal groups of people who write on
classical music into exactly those camps.

Of course no one will admit that they would rather have bad music of their
camp over good music of the other.  But in the end, given the power to do
anything, that is exactly what is opted for, almost every single time.

To say again what should be obvious - artists are treated by you people
like servants, we are supposed to enter quietly, produce what is demanded,
and not have much to say that cannot be said in a review.  An performer is
treated like a whore - of value only inso far as the listener is serviced.
Descriptions of performances dwell on the satisfaction of the listner.
Mozart got a better deal from Salzburg, because at least he got free meals
out of it.

Yes, I'm being abrasive.  But there is no point to being polite, because
those who are hell bent on saying morally objectionable things, and making
inane assertions about art are not going to stop, nor are others going to
tell them to stop.  This is not an exageration, if one looks at the basis
for the verbiage that is used, one finds similar assumptions about what is
and is not human.  It is long past time to stop this.

Perhaps someday all of this verbiage that floats around will be tossed in
the bin with the n word and the k word and the c word - and be regarded
with the same quaint embarassment that wife beating humor now is, but it
does not seem like it is going to happen until a few people are willing
to stand up and have the snot beaten out of them for making the obvious
declaration that the whole game is sick and reprehensible.

I'm standing up, simply because it seems that no one else has the guts to.

- - -

To define who is entitled to choose what is art is to define who is and is
not human.

The purpose of the art world is to connect artists and audiences.

Style does not define art or the times, but instead is an accident of
activity.

Stirling S Newberry
[log in to unmask]