Katerwauling

[IED0DXM%UCLAMVS.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU]

Subject: Katerwaul
>From: Joe Turner <cutter%hub.umb.edu@RELAY.CS.NET>
>Subject: KompilaTion
>Unfortunately, in the time it's taken me to do this, I've lost the track
>sheet that was with the tape.

Smooth move, Joe! IED will send out a xerox of his track's listing,
but it may not be in time for the Katemas party. Let's hope so, since
most of the excerpts from his track are virtually unidentifiable without
the listing. But don't worry, nobody's really mad at you...

>Speaking of the KompilaTion, if the point is to come up with a bunch of
>tapes that you could sit and listen to and get a neat diverse selection
>of music, what is the point of putting snippets on?  I'm listening to the tape
>now and it's SO jarring.

But IS that the point of the KompilaTion tape? Apparently quite a number
of KonTributors thought the point was to introduce as much of their
recommended music to other L-Hs as possible, not to provide a perfect,
unedited copy of one or two pieces to listen to over and over. Most
people in this group probably have a pretty good idea already about
the general areas of music they're most interested in. Therefore,
in a lot of cases they won't need a whole track to decide whether
a given kind of music is something they want to explore further.
And if they do like that kind of music, even a whole unedited track
from one record is probably not going to be enough for them, and
they'll have to go out and buy the album(s) anyway. Offering a larger
selection of excerpts rather than one or two tracks seems more practical,
given the conditions of and expectations for such a compilation.

>From: Jeff Dalton <jeff%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
>Subject: does not exist (was "reincarnation")
>Anyway, when considering Kate the question is surely whether reincarnation
>is esoteric for Kate, who is appropriating the notion from outside, not
>whether it is esoteric for practicing Buddhists.

Jeff, IED respectfully suggests that you check "esoteric" in
the dictionary. The word makes no sense in the context of your
sentence. An idea can't very well be "esoteric _for_" (IED's italics)
someone who has taken the trouble to learn something about the idea!
"Esoteric" means "uncommon," "little known," "arcane," "obscure".
>From the context of your sentence, it appears that you are using
the word as though it means something pejorative, like "pretentious".
It does _not_ mean "pretentious". And even if it did, it's ridiculous
to think that Westerners should _remain_ ignorant of Eastern
ideas lest they be labeled "pretentious". Especially if the
ideas are as well known and broadly accepted as those associated
with Buddhism and Hinduism!

-- Andrew