>>You get a lot of bang for your buck out of Beethoven's Fifth and
>>Stravinsky's Pulcinella. Furthermore, if you've heard Billie Holiday,
>>Ella Fitzgerald, Joan Morris, or Mildred Bailey, why would you bother
>>to listen to Britney Spears or the Simpsons (J&A) more than once?
>Those same arguments were made about some of those same artists fifty
>years ago--if you knew Caruso, why would you listen to Holiday and
>Fitzgerald? Am I suggesting that Britney Spears is the equivalent of
>those giants? I most certainly am not. I am suggesting that I find it
>extremely unlikely that most of the people on this list have ever sat
>down and listened to a Britney Spears album all the way through even
>once, much less repeatedly, in an honest attempt to see what might attract
>so many millions of fans. (For the record, I never have either.)
I have. I felt I wasted my time, but then again, my time isn't particularly
>>If you've heard Ellington, Parker, or Basie, what would be the attraction
>>of rap? Knowing the first-rate tends to clear out a lot of tripe.
>Without meaning any disrespect to Steve, who has proven in the past
>that he most certainly has an excellent knowledge of these artists, I'd
>submit that Miles Davis, who likely knew the oeuvre of those artists
>even better, having played extensively with Parker and recording a tribute
>to Ellington, as well as being a brilliant and learned artist himself,
>obviously, thought rap a valid enough genre to have recorded a rap album.
>If I recall correctly, Steve, you have little patience for those who
>dismiss dodecaphonic without ever really having given it a chance. I'd
>argue the same goes for any genre.
I'd agree. I'm guilty of painting with too broad a brush. I have heard
rap that was fairly interesting, mostly by jazz musicians: Scott's Miles
Davis and Quincy Jones foremost among them. Their sense of rhythm and
phrasing was far more sophisticated than what you normally get. On the
other hand, as a moldy fig myself, I prefered their bop period.