Brahms 1st as Beethovens 10th

[Gurn Blanston]

Just as an addendum to my earlier post, I would like to ask: when did intellectual stimulation stop being entertainment? Is there some mutual exclusivity clause being invoked?

------------------
Regards,
Gurn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's my opinion, I may be wrong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Euterpe]

Originally posted by Big D:
Dear beloved friends: When I used the term "goons" and "stink", I simply had no idea what I was about to cause. I did not mean to imply that I hated all other composers outside of Beethoven: I only meant to write that I did not like a lot of the later 19th century composers who, in my opinion, simply copied the style of B. As a matter of fact, I listen to many composers outside of B, even those from the 20th century, such as Prokofiev and Stravinsky.
My point in writing was to say that I did not mean to offend anyone by my comments and am sorry if I did so. I was only trying to generate debate. I promise not to use "shock words" such as "goon" or "stink" again!

Much Love,
Big D

goon: [slang] 1. A ruffian or thug 2. A stupid or grotesque individual.

...maybe use a different word next time.

"Stink" was a pretty severe way of describing other composers. I understood what you meant since I tend to be the down-to-earth type who says it like it is and reads between the lines. Keep in mind though, haughty types will nitpick every word you use. I've learned that from writing commercials that aired on classical radio. Despite your play on words, some will refuse to even try to understand what you mean, no matter how clear you make it. Nonetheless, "goons" and "stink" may not have been the best choice of words to describe your sentiments. I have a hard time believing that you abhor many Romantic composers THAT much.

[Euterpe]

In response to Haffner:

"There is far more to music than how it sounds! If we live by this then we all become musical idiots."


Music is the art of sound. So, yes, in my opinion it is about how music sounds.

"We live in the most close-minded society in history; new works cannot be performed because all the stupid public wants to hear is the music of the past! Yes, it is great music, but if you do not open your minds and your hearts then this generation will produce no great composers, or artists for that matter! This is the greatest tragedy that could ever occur; does anyone want to be remembered as the generation whose great artists were Britney Spears and 50 Cent?"

I won't argue with regarding your opinion of Britney and 50 Cent. I do, however, listen to them both. When I'm in the mood for fun, mindless music I go to them. They serve their purpose.

"It sickens me that the best selling authors today are Tom Clancy and Stephen King, such trash deserves to not be spoken of! Though it may be entertaining, Western civilization (at least in North America) has become so preoccupied with entertainment that they no longer care for art. Thus "popular" music, which is of no value other than that of entertainment, has essentially obliterated serious music. But no one seems to understand this and worse, no one seems to care. All they want is a nice tune! They could care less about enlightenment, about making themselves better human beings or at least this is how it appears."


What is popular music? It is music that is popular - music people want to hear. The fact that certain music is popular does not in and of itself make the music worthless or bad. You've made a similar comment on another thread where you've complained about the obscene use of serious music and, quite frankly, your views alienate people who may want to give "serious" music a try.

"Art is what makes life worth living, it teaches us what it is to be alive and helps us to understand both ourselves and our place in the universe. I applaud everyone who appreciates and loves art of the past but if you are stuck in the past, then this generation will have nothing to show for itself. How will we be viewed as a culture in several hundred years? Nothing of any value is popular and why, because 90% of the world conforms to the life motto of ignorance is bliss. They do not want to think because it is easier not to and how this outrages and saddens me! To think that I am devoting myself to the arts, and now, at age 18, already I realize my existence, no matter how meaningful my creations, will be of little meaning to anyone because of the fickle, watered down world in which I live!

Serious music now makes up 3.5% of the music industry's profits (again, this is in the cultural hell that is North America) and most of this is people buying Mozart and Beethoven, and people who want music to sooth them. I wonder how much of the music industry's profit is made up of modern serious music; my guess would be not even one one-thousandth of a percent. And this idea of liking music for a tune is to blame.

Yes music is entertaining, I as everyone in the world listen with a somewhat indifferent ear occasionally looking only for "tunefulness" but when this is all one does, they do not love music, they do it a great injustice. Everyone has their passions and if art is not one I suppose that is fine but to degrade art by seeking its entertainment value only offends me, it offends me more than anything on earth.

My apologies to King Stephen because this is not directed at you. I do not know you personally but this has been coming to the forefront in my life lately and thus I said what I felt I had to say concerning that which I believe should be of great concern to all human beings. I see the intelligence in your argument concerning Rod's views (which I do not understand but though they seem to be sincere I cannot argue with them) and you should not consider yourself grouped along with the ignorant masses I am discussing.[/B][/QUOTE]"

Well, I must be one of the ignorant masses because I like popular music. Oh the drama! How many times must you inform us that you're only 18 and of far superior intelligence? Supreme intelligence is a wonderful gift to be shared with the world, not used to separate oneself from the "ignorant masses." It's all in how one sees things. Is it the person who sees value only in popular music and rejects the value of serious music who is ignorant? Or is it the other way around?

You are correct to imply that the majority of popular musicians and artists will carry no value far into the future - but of the many composers that existed years ago, how many of them have been long forgotton? We'll never know will we?

[This message has been edited by Euterpe (edited 10-31-2004).]

[This message has been edited by Euterpe (edited 10-31-2004).]

[atserriotserri]

Originally posted by Haffner:
You all make interesting arguments but by them I am left unsatisfied. atserriotserri, your argument about not having time to understand is very weak. Yes of course, everyone has other commitments besides music but what you are saying boarders on pure laziness. To seek a familiar work rather than a new one so as to deter disappointment is simply playing it safe and to me a very boring way to live; you seek the entertainment value of music but why are you entertained by "lesser" works as you call them of the great composers? Because they are pleasant or inoffensive and easy to listen to? What are you then but an indifferent bystander?

Oh God *sigh*
Since I've been alluded...

Not having enought time a weak argument??? It's holidays today in Spain and I've left my girlfriend sleeping to go to work, and now I'm having my cup of tea and relaxing a bit have to listen to this (incidentally, listening to Bartok, concert for orchestra Sz116 & concert for violin and orchestra SZ112). No, Haffner, don't have any time.

Lazyness might be also listening the surface of thousands of different works instead of listening profoundly to one work played by several different performers, by the same performer in different times of his/her life, live or in a recording session, different conductors... I can tell I find more pleasure in listening a whole evening 1 single piano sonata that after some years of listening I definitely love, performed by Gould, Ashkenazy, Arrau, Biret & Rubinstein, so I spend a quiet evening with just one piece of music going back and forward, changing from one cd to other, identifying differences, wondering why, how, thinking, meditating..., than perhaps looking around for something new. I have tenths of cds I haven't yet even put on the cd player and they're waiting for their time. I consider lazyness another behaviour, if I'm wrong, accept my apologies since in that case, yes, I'm lazy.

How many millions of hours of recorded music there are? One can't listen to all of them, even less assimilate them. I want my time, and take my time, to enjoy 1 piece I somehow discovered and I like, and want to enjoy it my own way, with time, because I know positively I'm missing a lot of music, because one composer may take you to another, one piece may take you to another, one style may take you to another, one instrument may take you to another, etc... But I put an stop to it for two main reasons: budget & time. I have enough records yet to listen to add some more. I have a list long enough of composers I want to dedicate more time to deepen on their works to add some guys that may well be another "product" for the market, more elitist perhaps but why not? a product.

"you seek the entertainment value of music but why are you entertained by "lesser" works as you call them of the great composers? Because they are pleasant or inoffensive and easy to listen to?"

You, being more educated in music than I am, should know that in the bagatelles of such a relevant composer as Beethoven there may well be as much wisdom than in some works by some other gentleman, no matter he lived the XVIth or XXIst century. As I told you:
Why buying something from someone perhaps I'll like but perhaps not (again, composed on the XVIth or XXIst century), than buy another record from X, (being X a composer I know and like) and listen to some of his works I haven't listened yet or to another performance that may put the stress in other aspects different than those I know from other performances??

You forget one thing under my humble point of view: You're not the truth-keeper, you express your views as we all do, we share information, we express our likes and dislikes, we share the feelings certain music arises in us and ask opinions.

"What are you then but an indifferent bystander? "
Someone who don't teach, but exercises his personal right to find peace, thrills, curiosity, pleasure, euphoria, melancholy, sadness, fear in music AND PREFERS INVESTING HIS TIME LOOKING FOR THIS EMOTIONS AND KNOWLEDGE SO I CAN BE HAPPIER AND CONVERSATE WITH OTHER PEOPLE ABOUT PREFERENCES, FEELINGS... AND LEARN MORE, THAN MOANING ABOUT HOW PATHETIC MUSIC MARKET AND SOME PEOPLE ARE, BECAUSE I KNOW POSITIVELY THEY ARE PATHETIC (yes, we agree on that!! just that our reactions are different). DON'T WANT, NOR NEED, NOR I'M ABLE TO TEACH, PREACH OR IMPOSE ANYTHING.

Sorry, but got work to do. Think I'll move to Chopin's waltzes....

[Euterpe]

Originally posted by atserriotserri:
Oh God *sigh*
Since I've been alluded...

Not having enought time a weak argument??? It's holidays today in Spain and I've left my girlfriend sleeping to go to work, and now I'm having my cup of tea and relaxing a bit have to listen to this (incidentally, listening to Bartok, concert for orchestra Sz116 & concert for violin and orchestra SZ112). No, Haffner, don't have any time.

Lazyness might be also listening the surface of thousands of different works instead of listening profoundly to one work played by several different performers, by the same performer in different times of his/her life, live or in a recording session, different conductors... I can tell I find more pleasure in listening a whole evening 1 single piano sonata that after some years of listening I definitely love, performed by Gould, Ashkenazy, Arrau, Biret & Rubinstein, so I spend a quiet evening with just one piece of music going back and forward, changing from one cd to other, identifying differences, wondering why, how, thinking, meditating..., than perhaps looking around for something new. I have tenths of cds I haven't yet even put on the cd player and they're waiting for their time. I consider lazyness another behaviour, if I'm wrong, accept my apologies since in that case, yes, I'm lazy.

How many millions of hours of recorded music there are? One can't listen to all of them, even less assimilate them. I want my time, and take my time, to enjoy 1 piece I somehow discovered and I like, and want to enjoy it my own way, with time, because I know positively I'm missing a lot of music, because one composer may take you to another, one piece may take you to another, one style may take you to another, one instrument may take you to another, etc... But I put an stop to it for two main reasons: budget & time. I have enough records yet to listen to add some more. I have a list long enough of composers I want to dedicate more time to deepen on their works to add some guys that may well be another "product" for the market, more elitist perhaps but why not? a product.

"you seek the entertainment value of music but why are you entertained by "lesser" works as you call them of the great composers? Because they are pleasant or inoffensive and easy to listen to?"

You, being more educated in music than I am, should know that in the bagatelles of such a relevant composer as Beethoven there may well be as much wisdom than in some works by some other gentleman, no matter he lived the XVIth or XXIst century. As I told you:
Why buying something from someone perhaps I'll like but perhaps not (again, composed on the XVIth or XXIst century), than buy another record from X, (being X a composer I know and like) and listen to some of his works I haven't listened yet or to another performance that may put the stress in other aspects different than those I know from other performances??

You forget one thing under my humble point of view: You're not the truth-keeper, you express your views as we all do, we share information, we express our likes and dislikes, we share the feelings certain music arises in us and ask opinions.

"What are you then but an indifferent bystander? "
Someone who don't teach, but exercises his personal right to find peace, thrills, curiosity, pleasure, euphoria, melancholy, sadness, fear in music AND PREFERS INVESTING HIS TIME LOOKING FOR THIS EMOTIONS AND KNOWLEDGE SO I CAN BE HAPPIER AND CONVERSATE WITH OTHER PEOPLE ABOUT PREFERENCES, FEELINGS... AND LEARN MORE, THAN MOANING ABOUT HOW PATHETIC MUSIC MARKET AND SOME PEOPLE ARE, BECAUSE I KNOW POSITIVELY THEY ARE PATHETIC (yes, we agree on that!! just that our reactions are different). DON'T WANT, NOR NEED, NOR I'M ABLE TO TEACH, PREACH OR IMPOSE ANYTHING.

Sorry, but got work to do. Think I'll move to Chopin's waltzes....

Good point. I find it amusing that an individual who complains that serious music is a dying breed that is being taken over by mindless popular music is the same person who tries to tell others that they should listen to the same music he does, for the same reasons he does, and spend the same amount of time researching music the way he does. Moreover, if one does not think exactly the way he does, they are one of the ignorant masses.

[Haffner]

Gurn,
As to your first point, from what I have read, some of the music of Mozart and Beethoven was perceived as modern music is perceived today. Beethoven's music was often criticized for having no melody; to me, to call music with some of the most beautiful melodies ever written devoid of melody is outrageous, but people of the day had never been exposed to this kind of melody. At the premiere of the Marriage of Figaro, the crowd booed and hissed, this, a work of such unparalleled grace and divine beauty! This is why I argue the case for modern music, even that which I do not like or do not yet understand because if I do not give it a fair chance and give it several involved listens then I am no better than the fools who booed The Marriage of Figaro.

If you have done this, approached modern music with an open mind and open heart and are still not convinced then I entirely respect your opinion concerning this subject. From your post, it seems you are this person, but if you are one of the many who hear the dissonance and say "Ugh!" then I cannot respect what you say. One must be condition to dissonance so that it no longer sounds like dissonance. This may sound like a stupid concept but this is all I can really say when you speak of music which presents its listener with an "unrelieved, unresolved barrage"; either you have come across some bad modern music or you cannot accept dissonance, I assume it would probably be the former.

Please do not think that I feel music of the past is not capable of expressing every emotion in existence because I do. I am of course familiar with the Quintet, it is superb! But it is also one of Mozart's compositions which I am sure the public found to be harsh and unpleasant. To our modern ears it does not sound as such (though still as moving) but had we lived then it most likely would have.

The one problem I see with modern music or rather atonality is that it seems impossible to express simple happiness; I asked my composition teacher if he knew of a way to do so using modern materials and he did not. Perhaps most modern composers have become completely unconcerned with emotional expression if the style in which they write makes the expression of happiness impossible!


As to your final statement concerning art and entertainment, this is truly one of the most insightful things I have read concerning this subject. I entirely agree but feel I should clarify my own statement concerning this. Yes I said music cannot be both art and entertainment but what I meant, or what I feel now in my less emotionally charged state, is that if music does nothing more than entertain, than it must not be perceived as art though all music considered art must entertain. Art music must, in my opinion, do three things (essentially); 1. It must further music itself by introducing that which has not yet been heard, 2.It must affect the listener's emotional state in a significant way and 3. It must not use cheap effects or stereotypical procedures AT ANY TIME to affect the listener.

I did not mention entertainment because for me, to be profoundly moved emotionally is to be entertained. I will never say that one must have a mature intellect to appreciate art music, for I feel this to be entirely untrue; all one requires is emotional maturity.

King Stephen,
Well, first of all, it somewhat offends me that you would think I would respond with "You don't understand" as if I don't respect your views or have any of my own which are of any value. I don't believe I have made any such post in the past where I have said simply "You don't understand" so please do not make me out to be someone who is arrogant and demeaning because I am not that person.

In response to your question, I would have to disagree that anyone would survive well without new art; that is, art which is your own.

You say I have not anywhere said why we should open our minds up to new art, and upon looking back, I have not. For this I am sorry so I will give you my opinion now.

There are several reasons why new art is important, one being that art, more so than anything, defines a generation. Great art surmises the spirit of a time and becomes the voice of all of humanity. Though the greatest of art becomes the voice of all generations (Beethoven's 9th or MS, Goethe's Faust, Shakespeare's Hamlet) it still remains the product of the generation in which it was created. Though we all may love Beethoven and his work, and though he is speaking for us because we are human, it does not speak as strongly as it does for those of the 18th and 19th centuries. The spirit of his day is contained in his work, thus no matter how much we may wish it, this is not our voice, it is the voice of the past.

Do you not want a voice? You seem to be an incredibly intelligent and sincere individual and yet when you told me to "Beat down the doors but don't beat on mine" this upset me immensely. If there is no more art, what are we to conclude? Well, either all that can be said has been said (which will never occur!) or no one cares about what it means to be part of humanity. Perhaps this is why most of the art of the 20th century is sterile as you say (and I do agree, though note the use of most), because it is surmising a generation which is sterile, cold and indifferent, concerned only with pretty melodies!

When I was about 15-17, I was interested almost solely in popular music. Bob Dylan (whom I saw 5 times in concert) was my idol. He is, as well as the Beatles, the great voice of the past. When my uncle asked me what I was listening to I told him about Dylan and other artists of the same generation, Pink Floyd, The Band and so on. He remarked, "That's all well and fine but that's my music, I grew up with it; you'll need something one day to call your own and it can never be that music because it's mine!"

At the time it seemed a foolish notion but he is absolutely right; though these artists expressed ideals which are universal to all humans, they belong to a time which is not my own and thus were concerned with ideals that I will forever remain indifferent to. Thus, I present you with this, what does this generation have to say and why is it not being said? Consequently, if it is being said today, by great talents, why is no one listening?

Peter,
Are the composers you speak of commonly accepted? How many know their names and how many know the names of Beethoven, Mozart, Chopin or Bach? Of course those versed in music are familiar with them but as for those who are not, these composers are entirely unfamiliar and if heard, unliked! The other day in the car I popped in Bartok's 4th String Quartet, a work of great depth which could take an entire lifetime to understand, my Mother's response was "What is this crap?" and I assure you, among those I interact with, it is not an uncommon one.

After making this remark I implored her to listen, to really listen to the notes, the lines, the direction, and most of all to the expression. After perhaps one minute she said "I don't want to listen, I just want something that flows, like Mozart"

Flows, what the hell does this even mean? There exist no awkward passages in the Bartok quartet, absolutely none! Thus by the definition of the term, the Bartok work indeed "flows". But her definition is that which passes by without making too much of a racket in the process, sadly, this is the definition of good music to too many.

As to the audience for classical music being small, even in Beethoven's day? If so you give me great hope but I had always thought that in those days the majority preferred such music.

Euterpe
Well my apologies if I alienate anyone because this is not or has never been my intent in expressing my opinion. I never once said popular music is of no value, I said it is of no value other than entertainment. And in terms of classifying popular music, I deem it to be that which is written by amateur composers or music which is in no way intended to be artistic. Let's be frank, popular music is not art. Musically speaking popular music has not evolved in any way since Elvis and thus since it continues to use the same means of "expression" I do not consider this serious composition. Serious composition seeks new paths and thus I make the distinction between Serious and Popular music based on this principle. I enjoy popular music just as you do but I do not, as I am sure anyone who is being sincere, deem it important artistically.

Originally posted by Euterpe:
"Oh the drama! How many times must you inform us that you're only 18 and of far superior intelligence?"

Well I believe I have revealed my age twice on these boards, once because another poster asked me what it was, and the second time in this post. Also, I don't believe I have ever informed anyone that I am of "far supieror intelligence" because that would be rude and more importantly because I do not believe this to be the case. I read a post by you complaining about the attitude of the young people on this board and how they try to make it seem like they are geniuses. Well if you feel I am doing this you are greatly mistaken. I can assure you that I do not post on this board to flaunt my intellect but to provoke thought and stimulate debate. I post because I feel others may find it of interest to be exposed to another's opinion and I read other's posts because their opinion interests me. If my posts do not interest you, don't read them. Other than that I have nothing to say except I have no interest bickering with someone who's argument is based on callous insults. Make no mistake that is what I consider this to be and for that reason I have nothing left to say to you.

atserriotserri
Well I have little more to say to you than I did to Euterpe. Why do you insult me when all I am doing is expressing my opinion and debating yours? Would you like me just to say "You think how you think and I will think how I think" and have no debate? I did not mean to insult you though you seem insulted and angry.

What you say reveals your passion for music so perhaps I judged you incorrectly but honestly, how would you have responded to someone who basically said "Why explore new works when I could be disappointed? I'll go with the sure thing!" I think had you read this you would have responded in a similar manner as I did.

As for your angry rant at the end and your statement that I think I am the "truth-keeper", why does one do this? This was an intelligent post but you have offended me so greatly that I have no interest to respond. Also, I apologize if you mistake my passion for the arts as "MOANING", but to offend me in such a manner is rather cruel and I don't think I will have much to say to you in the near future. Apparently, when one expresses his opinions and asks others to explain theirs this makes them an egoist and arrogant, if you want to think this way that is fine, but I don't think there is any need for the cold bitterness present in your post.

[Haffner]

Originally posted by Euterpe:

Good point. I find it amusing that an individual who complains that serious music is a dying breed that is being taken over by mindless popular music is the same person who tries to tell others that they should listen to the same music he does, for the same reasons he does, and spend the same amount of time researching music the way he does. Moreover, if one does not think exactly the way he does, they are one of the ignorant masses.

Sorry I missed your "post" or I would have included a response to it in mine. I don't believe you understand the concept of debate, perhaps before posting you should look this up. I am not telling anyone what to do, I am providing them with my opinion. You really are offensive, I am tahnkful you are a rare breed on this forum.

[Peter]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Haffner:
from what I have read, some of the music of Mozart and Beethoven was perceived as modern music is perceived today. At the premiere of the Marriage of Figaro, the crowd booed and hissed, this, a work of such unparalleled grace and divine beauty!


This wasn't totally the case - Mozart's operas were well received in Prague and even a work such as Beethoven's Eroica had many admirers as well as detractors at the first performance. The reasons for Mozart's 'failures' in Vienna were more political than musical.


Are the composers you speak of commonly accepted? How many know their names and how many know the names of Beethoven, Mozart, Chopin or Bach?

I think their names are known amongst educated people just as even Beethoven is unknown amongst uneducated. I recall being stunned around 10 years ago by someone who had never heard of Brahms or Liszt! I have friends who have no interest in classical music but have heard of Bartok, Stravinsky, Prokofiev and Shostakovich, but not Berio, Stockhausen, Ligetti orHarrison-Birtwhistle.



The other day in the car I popped in Bartok's 4th String Quartet, a work of great depth which could take an entire lifetime to understand, my Mother's response was "What is this crap?" and I assure you, among those I interact with, it is not an uncommon one.

I'm not sure I could cope with a Bartok quartet whilst driving!
I daresay she would have said the same of Beethoven's Grosse Fugue - I know my parents would and they apparently love Beethoven!



As the audience for classical music being small, even in Beethoven's day? If so you give me great hope but I had always thought that in those days the majority preferred such music.

You only have to read Beethoven's complaints of the Viennese taste and their preference for the tuneful Italian opera to see things haven't changed much - the ordinary people would have enjoyed most the dance music of the day and popular ballades - they would have known popular arias solely from the barrel organs that gtrinded them out relentlessly on street corners. As for other countries in Europe, I suspect most people knew the name Beethoven long before they knew a note of the music.

[/B]

though these artists expressed ideals which are universal to all humans, they belong to a time which is not my own and thus were concerned with ideals that I will forever remain indifferent to. Thus, I present you with this, what does this generation have to say and why is it not being said? Consequently, if it is being said today, by great talents, why is no one listening?

I think this is contradictory - if the values expressed by the great composers of the past are universal, how are they less relevant today and why should we be indifferent to them? The language they are expressed in may belong to their time but the values are timeless and therefore we shouldn't be indifferent - there is a Peter Warlock quote on the homepage of this site:

". . . Music is neither old nor modern: it is either good or bad music, and the date at which it was written has no significance whatever. Dates and periods are of interest only to the student of musical history. . . . All old music was modern once, and much more of the music of yesterday already sounds more old-fashioned than works which were written three centuries ago. All good music, whatever its date, is ageless - as alive and significant today as it was when it was written . ."

------------------
'Man know thyself'



[This message has been edited by Peter (edited 11-03-2004).]

[Big D]

Originally posted by Euterpe:

goon: [slang] 1. A ruffian or thug 2. A stupid or grotesque individual.

...maybe use a different word next time.

"Stink" was a pretty severe way of describing other composers. I understood what you meant since I tend to be the down-to-earth type who says it like it is and reads between the lines. Keep in mind though, haughty types will nitpick every word you use. I've learned that from writing commercials that aired on classical radio. Despite your play on words, some will refuse to even try to understand what you mean, no matter how clear you make it. Nonetheless, "goons" and "stink" may not have been the best choice of words to describe your sentiments. I have a hard time believing that you abhor many Romantic composers THAT much.

Dear Euterpe person:
Your comment about haughty types who nitpick was right! There are some people on this site who strike me as a bit snobbish. They could not see the jest I was using to convey my opinion.
In regards to abhoring Romantic composers, I don't hate or despise everything that they wrote; I only feel that a great deal of the works created by them strikes me as subpar as compared to the works of Beethoven.
There are many great pieces by Romantic composers that I enjoy listening to.
I openly aknowledge great Romantic works like Tchaikovsky's 6th symphony, which I feel is very moving and poignant. However, I find most of his other works as bombastic and over the top.
But really, all this is subjective. Let artistic appreciation reign and save us from the narrow minded!

Much Love,
Big D

[atserriotserri]

Originally posted by Haffner:
atserriotserri
Well I have little more to say to you than I did to Euterpe. Why do you insult me when all I am doing is expressing my opinion and debating yours? Would you like me just to say "You think how you think and I will think how I think" and have no debate? I did not mean to insult you though you seem insulted and angry.

What you say reveals your passion for music so perhaps I judged you incorrectly but honestly, how would you have responded to someone who basically said "Why explore new works when I could be disappointed? I'll go with the sure thing!" I think had you read this you would have responded in a similar manner as I did.

As for your angry rant at the end and your statement that I think I am the "truth-keeper", why does one do this? This was an intelligent post but you have offended me so greatly that I have no interest to respond. Also, I apologize if you mistake my passion for the arts as "MOANING", but to offend me in such a manner is rather cruel and I don't think I will have much to say to you in the near future. Apparently, when one expresses his opinions and asks others to explain theirs this makes them an egoist and arrogant, if you want to think this way that is fine, but I don't think there is any need for the cold bitterness present in your post.[/B]

I don't think I've insulted you. I tried to make my point as clear as you do!! You certainly were very clear. If you take a look at what you wrote, some people may feel insulted. Everything depends on the context: Being a mere "indifferent bystander" is a compliment in the context of your post? You positioned yourself, you DEFINED something, assume the effects of your labelling. Anyway; my answer is: No, I'm not an indifferent bystander to the music I listen, but Yes, I'm an indifferent bystander to determined people who listen determined kinds of music. I prefer save my time in listening carefully to the music I choose.

We're indeed having a debate, don't we?

I didn't mean to feel insulted nor angry. No sarcasm. Really. I guess you didn't want to insult me, we've shared our views sometimes. If my appassionate answer to your appassionate comments somehow hurted you, please forgive me. Honestly.

"How would you have responded to someone who basically said "Why explore new works when I could be disappointed? I'll go with the sure thing!" ". OK, OK, I don't have time right now to look back to my post (computer broken=posting at work=unsafe). But why presume why explore new works? means always listen to the same cd? we're not in the britney spears fanclub, are we? Anyway, there's some agreement on the way

"As for your angry rant at the end and your statement that I think I am the "truth-keeper", why does one do this? This was an intelligent post but you have offended me so greatly that I have no interest to respond."

Hold on! Intelligent??? That specific part of yours??? I'll quote your remarks about me:
"your argument about not having time to understand is very weak" You ignore my life

"what you are saying boarders on pure laziness" you ignored my point because you presumed I listen always the same couple of cds

"To seek a familiar work rather than a new one so as to deter disappointment is simply playing it safe and to me a very boring way to live" You presumed I don't find any pleasure on listening same piece by different composers.

As a resume: I understand that you presumed, guessed, in this case, labelled (at least me) and therefore answer according to your predefined conceptions. I'm describing what I guess is your mental process to write these things, under any circumstance try to insult or offend.

"Apparently, when one expresses his opinions and asks others to explain theirs this makes them an egoist and arrogant, if you want to think this way that is fine, but I don't think there is any need for the cold bitterness present in your post."

Apparently is me, the one who said how he approaches music, who explains the methodology he applicates when having time to listen to music, or how he discriminates one thing from another, or the sadness he feels for not being able to deepen his knowledge in music without criticising nor labelling anyother's approaches who has to apologize. In that case, I will do, but I encourage you to re-read your posts with critic spirit. I disagree with you in some things, I agree with you in others. That's life, and even more, that's a BB.
Perhaps if we could talk face-to-face I'd understand your expression and you could understand me, but, honestly, in written, you don't seem like asking anyone to express his opinions but asking anyone to say "you're right". I'm a lawyer, perhaps is my deformation of always thinking the other party is issuing a writ to the court....

"I don't think there is any need for the cold bitterness present in your post."
Anyway, if you allow me the joke, my post was everything but "cold".

[Peter]

Originally posted by atserriotserri:

"I don't think there is any need for the cold bitterness present in your post."
Anyway, if you allow me the joke, my post was everything but "cold".

Let's try and keep from getting personal or else this thread will have to close.

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Joy]

I'm surprised it isn't closed already!

------------------
'Truth and beauty joined'