Gaffaweb >
Love & Anger >
1990-01 >
[ Date Index |
Thread Index ]
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
From: emx.utexas.edu!ut-emx!slh@cs.utexas.edu (Susan L. Cecelia Harwood)
Date: 8 Jan 90 15:41:48 GMT
Subject: Re: Does Kate Bush read news?
Article-I.D.: ut-emx.23043
Distribution: na
Newsgroups: rec.music.gaffa
Organization: University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas
Posted: Mon Jan 8 09:41:48 1990
Posted-Date: 8 Jan 90 15:41:48 GMT
References: <21208@unix.cis.pitt.edu> <2002@eric.mpr.ca>
Reply-To: walt.cc.utexas.edu!amadeus@cs.utexas.edu(Susan Harwood)
In article <2002@eric.mpr.ca> hui@joplin.mpr.ca writes: > >In article <23019@ut-emx.UUCP> walt.cc.utexas.edu!amadeus@cs.utexas.edu >(Susan Harwood) writes: >>It's attitudes like that that make "serious" music inaccessible, not >>the music itself. > >Your last sentence struck me as especially true, and may explain why I >have always had difficulty reconciling "composition students'" opinions >about pop music and fans' opinions about pop music. >Yes, the attitude does matter. It certainly does matter a whole lot. >But why did you say my attitude was exclusive? Exclusive in the sense of possibly preventing other people from exploring such music by your attitude, which (to me) seems off-putting. >There is a lot of other exciting music going on out there. Yes, I... I think I knew that. That was never in question. >Where Kate stands in my own "scale" is a moot point. Granted. >I simply do not put Kate miles above everyone else simply because I >do not see evidence to justify it. Nobody said you needed to, remember? I don't remember that as being a problem. >But just to put things into perspective, I do have a complete >collection of Kate's work. My entire album/CD/cassette collection is >around 200. So that's not too bad as far as percentage goes? >Can we calm down now? It's interesting that you're the one saying 'can we calm down now?' when you're also the one who started this whole string by throwing in your philosophies about music when the original question was simply "Does Kate Bush read news?" Where Kate Bush stands in your scale is indeed a moot point, but in your side of the argument as well as mine. Yes, we can stop this whole thing, if you'll just answer me one question. What exactly do you mean when you say substantial? You've been throwing that word around a lot (as in "more substantial than Kate Bush"). Once I know precisely how you're applying that word, your argument might sound a little less... ummm, inaccessible.-- _______________________________________________________________________________ Susan L. Cecelia Harwood amadeus@walt.cc.utexas.edu *<:-) The University of Texas @Austin "...suspended in gaffa..." --Kate Bush _______________________________________________________________________________