Gerardo Constantin wrote:

>Despite you are rigth or not(because i know very few of Ellington,and i
>really don't care),this question is to the list: What have to do Ellington
>and other popular musicians in a classical music list?.

It seems to me that many musicians labelled "popular" (and it's not
a scientific category, any more than "classical" is) are at least as
interesting as those labelled "classical." "Classical" says nothing about
worth.  Furthermore, a composer like Ellington shares much in outlook and
technique with, say, Ginastera, as George Russell does with Stravinsky.
What I want to know is why you would keep them out.  I like to think of
myself as interested in the art of music.  The more music I exclude, the
less I know about the art.  I admit that this point of view will cause some
to think of the immanence of cultural meltdown, but to me this is more of
a hankering for lost youth, "when everything was better."

>Maybe i can understand it can be neccesary to explain some points related
>with the explanation of the original "theme":Real music is european.But
>more than that i don't think is worthwhile.

There's lots of European music I wouldn't give the time of day to, some
of it by names revered even by me.  I don't even know what the word "real"
means in this context, unless someone is trying to tell me that the best
music comes from Europe, an arguable proposition at best, and at worst
a stupendous example of W.  S.  Gilbert's "idiot who praises in
uncompromising tones / All centuries but this and every country but
his own."

Steve Schwartz