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