Roberts Peters message, so beautifully expressed, goes a whole lot deeper
than just why we like one thing and not another.  Pablo Massa also makes
a sound point by saying we have to make choices because there is so much
out there, and some is junk, so we must choose in order to avoid drowning
in bilge.  But the precept Robert is getting at is that all things have
validity even if its not valid to us personally (only referring to western
classical music) Tao is sometimes called the "middle way" in the west
because in western society we're habituated to thinking in adversarial
dialectic, to assume that there is a "right" way and that winning at all
costs means something.  But at the root of this is ego, which is a whole
other thing than real understanding.  Indeed, it harms learning because it
introduces extraneous values.  The Tao teaches that there are other ways of
enlightenment beyond the borders we're used to.  "Canary wars" (my bird is
better than yours) are ultimately destructive because music is by nature
individual and subjective.  The person in Roberts poem knows he can't
change the wind, so why fight? We can make choices, and influence what
happens, but the world will have its way regardless, so power games misuse
creative energy.  Whether it's Buxtehude or Philip Glass, all helps us on
our journey towards understanding what music means to us, through the
process of experience.  As Robert says, we have a "wonderful invitation"
to partake of a grand buffet.  If we pass on something, that's fine, but
it's there for others, and there's no gain in avoiding it a priori.

Anne
[log in to unmask]