Dave Runnion wrote:

>Actually what happens much, much more often is that a listener,
>educated or otherwise, enjoys a piece of music simply because they find
>it enjoyable, and others who don't share the same tastes deride them as
>fools or fakers or worse.  I think this is morally much more indefensible,
>frankly.  I have never, ever, encountered anyone who listens to something
>because someone else says they're stupid if they don't.  You're making this
>up, and at the same time calling into question others' perfectly reasonable
>taste in music and art.

I am certainly NOT making this up.  I have been called equally foolish for
NOT liking certain kinds of music because others say I should.  It happens
all the time.  And further, I am very happy to call tastes into question.
It's a perfectly legitimate thing to do.  Because my own tastes have been
called into question, I have on more than one occasion had the wherewithall
to rethink my opinions.  Sometimes I change them, and sometimes I don't.
But to never have one's opinions challenged to to be allowed to stagnate
and cease the learning process.  This is indeed morally indefensible.

>I suggest you get over your indignation at this kind of modernism. You
>don't like it, fine, but the Truth is that it is Art and it is enjoyable
>to a lot of people.

What, pray tell, do art and truth have to do with each other? They are two
different concepts.  Your quote above is made as a statement of truth.  You
say to me that Oliveros' heartbeat symphony is art.  I say it's dog shit.
Now who's telling the truth here, you or me?

>I would also take issue with the statement that music can't "just happen".

I never said that it can't.  Improvisation is the basis of jazz, and many
other forms of native and folk music.  But you can't call that composition.
If you want to tell me that Pauline Oliveros is having a concert of her
guided improvizations and the ticket will be thirty bucks to participate,
then fine.  I now know what I am in for and can participate at my will or
peril.  If you are telling me that Ms. Oliveros has composed some new
pieces for me to hear, and then I get to sit and listen to my heart-beat,
then you have commited fraud and I am due redress.

>The Truth is that it can indeed simply occur when set into motion.  Please
>listen to some of the tracks from http://mp3.com/tramuntana.  Some of it
>is garbage, but there are some things that are rather musical, and they
>are 100% improvised, unplanned, spontaneous and chance.

Again, were I to respond to your invitation (and being the open minded guy
that I am, I will) I would know going in what I was about to experience,
and I may indeed find musical elements in the above.  I won't however find
a musical composition, now will I?

>As a composer who's done exactly that, I have two reactions, one is that
>that kind of dismissal insults *my* intelligence, and the other is that
>when I write a series of improvisation instructions I could care even one
>whit for insulting your intelligence.  I don't write music to stroke your
>ego.

Now you're getting really defensive and personal, taking my comments about
a specific composer and event and applying them to what I might think about
your work, and in turn making me out to be the bad guy.  This kind of
statement doesn't even deserve a response.

>I find this kind of cynicism about someone's artistic endeavors to be
>awfully sad.

If they were artistic endeavors, it would be.  Even someone who appends
their signature with the title of composer can also be a fraud.

Kevin