Bridging the generation gap
Terry Nielsen
(which I despise) and I dig out the only name I can think of and say
"yeah, a lot of good it was for Tupac...he got murdered!" "No he
didn't!", my son proclaimed with that teenage 'man are parents ever
lame' tone to his voice, "he faked his death!". He then went into some
incoherent mumbo jumbo about Tupac living on an island and using the
name Machiavelli or something.
Ever the one to try to relate to my kids, I looked it up on the 'net and
found that indeed there are those who feel Tupac faked his murder.
My question is, are these people just contemporary versions of those who
regularly see Elvis in the 'relaxed fit' section of KMart, or is there
actually some serious and credible debate about Tupac's murder.
-----
Terry Nielsen
Canada
ICQ 25287119
Gary S. Callison
: My question is, are these people just contemporary versions of those
: who regularly see Elvis in the 'relaxed fit' section of KMart, or is
: there actually some serious and credible debate about Tupac's murder.
No. 'Tupac' spelled backwards is 'Kaput'.
--
Elvis^H^H^H^H^HHuey
Rich Clancey
+ So this evening my 15 year old son is extolling the virtues of rap music
+ (which I despise) and I dig out the only name I can think of and say
+ "yeah, a lot of good it was for Tupac...he got murdered!" "No he
+ didn't!", my son proclaimed with that teenage 'man are parents ever
+ lame' tone to his voice, "he faked his death!". He then went into some
+ incoherent mumbo jumbo about Tupac living on an island and using the
+ name Machiavelli or something.
Educational opportunity. Ask the kid who Machiavelli is. Be
prepared to tell him. That is, in case he doesn't know.
I'd point out how much more important it is to understand
Machiavelli than it is to care about the fate of some pop star, then
drop the subject and hope junior spends some of his quality time
thinking about his priorities.
--
:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:
rich clancey r...@world.std.com rcla...@massart.edu
On an autumn evening one remembers more of childhood
than at any other time of year.
- Graham Greene -
:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:
Arthur Wohlwill
>From: r...@world.std.com (Rich Clancey)
>Subject: Re: Bridging the generation gap
>Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 15:55:39 GMT
>Terry Nielsen (tnie...@home.com) wrote:
>+ So this evening my 15 year old son is extolling the virtues of rap music
>+ (which I despise) and I dig out the only name I can think of and say
>+ "yeah, a lot of good it was for Tupac...he got murdered!" "No he
>+ didn't!", my son proclaimed with that teenage 'man are parents ever
>+ lame' tone to his voice, "he faked his death!". He then went into some
>+ incoherent mumbo jumbo about Tupac living on an island and using the
>+ name Machiavelli or something.
What name is Jim Morrison using?
> Educational opportunity. Ask the kid who Machiavelli is. Be
>prepared to tell him. That is, in case he doesn't know.
> I'd point out how much more important it is to understand
>Machiavelli than it is to care about the fate of some pop star, then
>drop the subject and hope junior spends some of his quality time
>thinking about his priorities.
>--
I remember reading something that suggested that Machiavelli actually did not
have all that much power, but was good at hype.
Perhaps someone with better knowledge of history will be able to
enlighten me.
Arthur Wohlwill adwo...@UIC.EDU
deepstblu
>
> Terry Nielsen (tnie...@home.com) wrote:
> + So this evening my 15 year old son is extolling the virtues of rap music
> + (which I despise) and I dig out the only name I can think of and say
> + "yeah, a lot of good it was for Tupac...he got murdered!" "No he
> + didn't!", my son proclaimed with that teenage 'man are parents ever
> + lame' tone to his voice, "he faked his death!". He then went into some
> + incoherent mumbo jumbo about Tupac living on an island and using the
> + name Machiavelli or something.
>
> prepared to tell him. That is, in case he doesn't know.
>
> I'd point out how much more important it is to understand
> Machiavelli than it is to care about the fate of some pop star, then
> drop the subject and hope junior spends some of his quality time
> thinking about his priorities.
his death; that could be an interesting jumping-off point for a
discussion with the young'un.
Rick B.
TR
kind of argument is not going to help (unless perhaps you
discover that your son is right!). I mean, the main reason
you're investigating this is to figure out a way to disparage
rap. Hello? How is that going to bridge the generation gap? You
think if you convince your son that Tupac is dead he won't like
rap anymore? Wrong!
My son is the same age as yours. I listen to his music often (we
take turns choosing the music whenever we drive together
anywhere). Some I like, some I've learned to like, and some I'll
never like, but I respect his right to choose what he likes and
certainly don't argue about it. Not much, anyway. In turn, this
has given him a more open attitude about my music. We don't see
eye-to-eye by any means, but we respect each other's opinions
and have turned each other on to a lot of great stuff.
And I'll tell you this about rap: I don't care for most of it
very much, but I'm a musician and I respect it; it's very hard
to do well. Also, you have to admire the fact that some of the
poorest, most disadvantaged kids in the country are the only
ones in recent years to come up with a new, thriving form of
music.
Of course, a lot of rap has really awful messages. Go ahead and
disagree with the message of any particular song, but you don't
have to put down rap in general to do that.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Mr C
Terry Nielsen wrote in message <38B4D0...@home.com>...
<snip personal relevance of question concerning whether Tupac faked his
death>
>
>My question is, are these people just contemporary versions of those who
>regularly see Elvis in the 'relaxed fit' section of KMart, or is there
>actually some serious and credible debate about Tupac's murder.
>
NO. There is no serious and credible debate about anything related to
Tupac, his murder or the rap "music" genre as a whole. Any attempts to tell
you otherwise should be greeted with a half-stifled guffaw, a couple of
quick giggles and a pointed roll of the eyes.
Steve "they left a letter off the front of that word" Campbell
Matt Conrad
wrote:
>Tupac used the nom de disque "Makiaveli" (sp) on his last release before
>his death; that could be an interesting jumping-off point for a
>discussion with the young'un.
Actually, it was "Makaveli." That disc was his first album released
*after* his death (although it was already planned before the murder).
MWC
Matt Conrad
wrote:
>My question is, are these people just contemporary versions of those who
>regularly see Elvis in the 'relaxed fit' section of KMart, or is there
>actually some serious and credible debate about Tupac's murder.
There was a list going around the Internet asserting various reasons
why Tupac is still alive. At first glance it made me think, but after
some thought I realized it wasn't very persuasive.
I don't believe any intelligent person really thinks that Tupac is
still alive.
MWC
Terry Nielsen
>I mean, the main reason
> you're investigating this is to figure out a way to disparage
> rap. Hello? How is that going to bridge the generation gap? You
> think if you convince your son that Tupac is dead he won't like
> rap anymore? Wrong!
No, the main reason I'm pursuing this is to point out to my son the
importance of maintaining a healthy skepticism about these things. Rap
was just the launching point of the debate, but it alarmed me how
emphatically he had embraced what sounded like folkloric tripe to me.
"Bridging the generation gap" was just a quickly conceived thread title
to describe
the thrust of the dilemma, but in hindsight perhaps it was accurate. My
generation has similar legends about the faked demise and continued
existence of Elvis, Kennedy, Hitler and more. It was interesting to
hear my son sprout the same type of thing about someone from his
generation and perhaps therein lies the bridge.
Trouble was, when I went to research Tupac so I could talk to my son
with a little more knowledge base, I almost got sucked into the
conspiracy theories myself. That was why I was seeking some information
from people perhaps more familiar with the whole thing.
> My son is the same age as yours. I listen to his music often (we
> take turns choosing the music whenever we drive together
> anywhere). Some I like, some I've learned to like, and some I'll
> never like, but I respect his right to choose what he likes and
> certainly don't argue about it.
I agree to a point, but I find I have to take a stand against the
violence and often extreme profanity of it. I can only stand so much of
"Mutha fuckin this!" and "Mutha fuckin that!" before I have to say,
"excuse me, I don't want it in my house."
Agree or not, I do believe as a parent I have the right to draw some
lines.
> Of course, a lot of rap has really awful messages. Go ahead and
> disagree with the message of any particular song, but you don't
> have to put down rap in general to do that.
Point taken. Trouble is I deal on a daily basis with those that have
taken the awful messages to heart. The music of the 60's often had a
lot of anger in it too, but still had positive, life affirming
messages. Too much of what I hear today seems to be about lashing out
at the world with as much violence as possible for the sole redeeming
purpose of getting as much attention as you can before someone else
takes you out of the game.
Damn depressing if you ask me.
--
Mark Brader
>> My question is, are these people just contemporary versions of those who
>> regularly see Elvis in the 'relaxed fit' section of KMart, or is there
>> actually some serious and credible debate about Tupac's murder.
Matt Conrad writes:
> There was a list going around the Internet asserting various reasons
> why Tupac is still alive. At first glance it made me think, but after
> some thought I realized it wasn't very persuasive.
Hmm. I wonder if it would be instructive to relate the rumor of about
25 years ago that Paul McCartney was dead, and the things put forward
as evidence for that. I bet someone somewhere has a web page about it.
It's Ontario Provincial Police, by the way, not Ontario Police Depar-
tment as sometimes said. Look at the way the shoulder patch is lying
in the photo; you can see it's not a real D. Of course, if you were
buying into the rumor I suppose you'd say that part was evidence *for*
it -- they photographed it that way so it would look like a D!
--
Mark Brader | "There is ample evidence that Mr. Coyote was
Toronto | violating both the laws of gravity and inertia
m...@vex.net | at the time of this incident, and thus he is
| responsible for his own woes." --Stephen Menard
My text in this article is in the public domain.
Mycophile
news:adwohlwi.20...@uic.edu...
> >Terry Nielsen (tnie...@home.com) wrote:
> >+ So this evening my 15 year old son is extolling the virtues of rap
music
> >+ (which I despise) and I dig out the only name I can think of and say
> >+ "yeah, a lot of good it was for Tupac...he got murdered!" "No he
> >+ didn't!", my son proclaimed with that teenage 'man are parents ever
> >+ lame' tone to his voice, "he faked his death!". He then went into some
> >+ incoherent mumbo jumbo about Tupac living on an island and using the
> >+ name Machiavelli or something.
>
Last I heard, it was Tupac something...
Glenn Rice
>
> NO. There is no serious and credible debate about anything related to
> Tupac, his murder or the rap "music" genre as a whole. Any attempts to tell
> you otherwise should be greeted with a half-stifled guffaw, a couple of
> quick giggles and a pointed roll of the eyes.
Many people said the same thing about jazz music. Rap music is a
cultural phenomenon that has lasted quite a while now, and as such is as
open to "serious and credible debate" as any other aspect of culture.
You might not like rap, but your personal taste has absolutely no
bearing on the validity of the genre.
--
Glenn Rice Epiphyllum: <www.missouri.edu/~extgrice/nbc>
"The good people sleep much better at night than the bad people.
Of course, the bad people enjoy the waking hours much more." (Woody Allen)
Seanette Blaylock
>You might not like rap, but your personal taste has absolutely no
>bearing on the validity of the genre.
OTOH, personal taste in music does not reflect one's attitude about
racial matters, either. ISTR you calling me a racist last time the
subject of (c)rap "music" came up. The theory was apparently that if
one disliked the way said "music" sounded, it was due to racial
prejudice. I found that particular piece of bigotry of yours highly
offensive.
--
Seanette Blaylock
"You attribute perfect rationality to the whole of humanity, which has
to be one of the most misguided assumptions ever." - Alan Krueger in NANAE
[make obvious correction to address to send e-mail]
Glenn Rice
>
> Glenn Rice <extg...@showme.missouri.edu> wrote:
>
> >You might not like rap, but your personal taste has absolutely no
> >bearing on the validity of the genre.
>
> OTOH, personal taste in music does not reflect one's attitude about
> racial matters, either. ISTR you calling me a racist last time the
> subject of (c)rap "music" came up. The theory was apparently that if
> one disliked the way said "music" sounded, it was due to racial
> prejudice. I found that particular piece of bigotry of yours highly
> offensive.
Your memory is faulty. Refer to the following messages, written and
posted by myself on April 12 of last year, courtesy of Deja News:
=======================
http://x22.deja.com/=dnc/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=465517244&CONTEXT=951518877.929366055&hitnum=2
Seanette Blaylock wrote:
>
> I agree about rap [seems to me that most people omit the silent "c" at
> the beginning of that word]
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's crap. There were people
who thought John Coltrane and Charlie Parker were idiots. You could say
the same thing about many musical genres of the XXth century
=======================
http://x23.deja.com/=dnc/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=465641206&CONTEXT=951518988.647888960&hitnum=4
Seanette Blaylock wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Apr 1999 11:09:53 -0500, "Rice, Glenn P."
> <extg...@showme.missouri.edu> wrote:
> >Seanette Blaylock wrote:
> >> I agree about rap [seems to me that most people omit the silent "c" at
> >> the beginning of that word]
> >Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's crap. There were people
> >who thought John Coltrane and Charlie Parker were idiots. You could say
> >the same thing about many musical genres of the XXth century
>
> Ever hear of personal opinion?
No need to insult me. Of course I've heard of personal opinion. Those
people who thought that John Coltrane and Charlie Parker were idiots
were entitled to hold their own opinions, just as you are. You have made
my point for me: Your not liking rap is a matter of personal opinion --
but not necessarily one held by "most people" as you claim.
=======================
As you can see from these two posts (the only ones I contributed to that
thread), at no point did I accuse you of racism or racial prejudice. Nor
can anything in these two messages be construed as "bigotry". Feel free
to be offended at anything I post, of course -- I don't really care what
you think of me; but if you intend to make baseless accusations and put
words into my mouth, please try to get the facts straight first. You owe
me an apology, though I doubt I will get one from you.
Seanette Blaylock
>As you can see from these two posts (the only ones I contributed to that
>thread), at no point did I accuse you of racism or racial prejudice. Nor
>can anything in these two messages be construed as "bigotry". Feel free
>to be offended at anything I post, of course -- I don't really care what
>you think of me; but if you intend to make baseless accusations and put
>words into my mouth, please try to get the facts straight first. You owe
>me an apology, though I doubt I will get one from you.
You almost didn't, due entirely to that last clause.
I did have some memory of someone whining about racism, and given your
recent snipes at me on a mailing list we both read, had some reason to
believe it to have been you. My error.
Dutch Courage
>Glenn Rice <extg...@showme.missouri.edu> wrote:
>
>>You might not like rap, but your personal taste has absolutely no
>>bearing on the validity of the genre.
>
>OTOH, personal taste in music does not reflect one's attitude about
>racial matters, either.
Well, to me it depends on how you express that sentiment. Do you say "I don't
like rap," or "Rap isn't music"? Some people don't like Beethoven, I guess.
Would you take them seriously if they said "Beethoven isn't music"? Sure, a lot
of rap isn't very good, but then some classical music is less than creative.
Vivaldi kind of sucks, for instance, and, say, Ravel. So I do kind of wonder
what's up with that, why rap inspires such ire, and if it's not tied to the
blackness of it all after all.
> ISTR you calling me a racist last time the
>subject of (c)rap "music" came up.
One wonders why you're so touchy about this.
> The theory was apparently that if
>one disliked the way said "music" sounded, it was due to racial
>prejudice.
I think it's more denying the obvious musicality of it.
> I found that particular piece of bigotry of yours highly
>offensive.
Imagine how I feel about Bob and his whole little "Black people would be
happier in a more primitive society" thing.
Dutch "At least they don't want your women, huh Bob?" Courage, somewhere in the
wilderness of North America.
"I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn
human actions, but to understand them" -Spinoza
"The ridiculing and scorn, that's just gravy."-Courage
FW Lev
TR wrote:
>> Of course, a lot of rap has really awful messages. Go ahead and
>> disagree with the message of any particular song, but you don't
>> have to put down rap in general to do that.
>
>Point taken. Trouble is I deal on a daily basis with those that have
>taken the awful messages to heart. The music of the 60's often had a
>lot of anger in it too, but still had positive, life affirming
>messages. Too much of what I hear today seems to be about lashing out
>at the world with as much violence as possible for the sole redeeming
>purpose of getting as much attention as you can before someone else
>takes you out of the game.
>
>Damn depressing if you ask me.
"Hey, Joe, where you goin' with that gun in your hand?"
"Down by the river, I shot my lady."
"I'll stick my knife right down your throat."
-Lev
Seanette Blaylock
Bridging the generation gap":
>Jen Davis <jne...@fcc.gov> writes:
>> I *really* dislike the one that goes:
>> "<thumpa-thumpa-thumpa> <filthy monotonal talking> <thumpa-thumpa-
>> thumpa>"
>> Is there *more* than one?
>I own several hundred rap CDs and not one track on any of them
>even approximately answers that description. You're just making
>yourself look silly.
Really? Jen just perfectly described the (c)rap "songs" I hear blaring
out of boom cars on a regular basis.
Big Iron5
>> >OTOH, personal taste in music does not reflect one's attitude about
>> >racial matters, either.
>>
>> Well, to me it depends on how you express that sentiment. Do you say "I
>don't
>> like rap," or "Rap isn't music"? Some people don't like Beethoven, I guess.
>> Would you take them seriously if they said "Beethoven isn't music"? Sure, a
>lot
>> of rap isn't very good, but then some classical music is less than
>creative.
>> Vivaldi kind of sucks, for instance, and, say, Ravel. So I do kind of
>wonder
>> what's up with that, why rap inspires such ire, and if it's not tied to the
>> blackness of it all after all.
>
>I think rap isn't music.
Well, then, you're simply wrong as a matter of fact -- it unequivocally is
music. You don't have to like it, you can think it's crappy music, but it is
certainly "music" by any meaningful definition.
> I'm also black.
Whatever you say.
>Am I a racist?
Wouldn't surprise me.
>> > ISTR you calling me a racist last time the
>> >subject of (c)rap "music" came up.
>>
>> One wonders why you're so touchy about this.
>
>You wonder why someone is touchy about being called a racist?
Except that she apparently wasn't called a racist.
Big Iron5
>> >I think rap isn't music.
>>
>> Well, then, you're simply wrong as a matter of fact -- it unequivocally is
>> music. You don't have to like it, you can think it's crappy music, but it
>is
>> certainly "music" by any meaningful definition.
>
>What's your "meaningful definition?" Explain how any purposeful man-made
>sound could conceivably be excluded from the "it's music" fold using this
>definition.
I would say it involves ordering tones or sounds in succession, in combination,
and in temporal relationships to produce a composition having unity and
continuity (which, amazingly enough, is what Webster's says).
Thus, knocking on the door so that someone will open it is not generally
"music." Rap is music -- that is not open to debate. You are free not to like
it, of course. I don't like Billy Joel, but I wouldn't deny that it's music.
Some people don't like to listen to Ornette Coleman -- but it's still music.
Shawn Wilson
"Jen Davis" <jne...@fcc.gov> wrote in message
news:MPG.132252a73...@news.giganews.com...
> Tell you what: if you agree that William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy both
> produced albums of "music," I will agree with you that rap is "music" in
> exactly the same way.
How about you tell us what specific rap songs you're familiar with?
Alec Horgan
> Tell you what: if you agree that William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy both
> produced albums of "music," I will agree with you that rap is "music" in
> exactly the same way.
The scare quotes really aren't necessary and don't become you.
Shatner's and Nimoy's albums are unquestionably music; bad
music, to be sure, but plainly and self-evidently music.
What's to be gained by trying to deny this fact?
Alec
Alec Horgan
> Shawn Wilson (shawn....@worldnet.att.net) writes;
> > How about you tell us what specific rap songs you're familiar with?
>
> I *really* dislike the one that goes:
>
> "<thumpa-thumpa-thumpa> <filthy monotonal talking> <thumpa-thumpa-
> thumpa>"
>
> Is there *more* than one?
I own several hundred rap CDs and not one track on any of them
even approximately answers that description. You're just making
yourself look silly.
Alec
FW Lev
>Alec Horgan had some very interesting things to say about "Re:
>Bridging the generation gap":
>>Jen Davis <jne...@fcc.gov> writes:
>>> I *really* dislike the one that goes:
>>> "<thumpa-thumpa-thumpa> <filthy monotonal talking> <thumpa-thumpa-
>>> thumpa>"
>>> Is there *more* than one?
>>I own several hundred rap CDs and not one track on any of them
>>even approximately answers that description. You're just making
>>yourself look silly.
>
>Really? Jen just perfectly described the (c)rap "songs" I hear blaring
>out of boom cars on a regular basis
The description "filthy monotonal talking" conjures up Ben Stein with
Tourette's; hardly a discription of any rap song that I've ever heard.
-Lev
Bob Ward
wrote:
>Jen Davis <jne...@fcc.gov> writes:
>
>> Shawn Wilson (shawn....@worldnet.att.net) writes;
>> > How about you tell us what specific rap songs you're familiar with?
>>
>> I *really* dislike the one that goes:
>>
>> "<thumpa-thumpa-thumpa> <filthy monotonal talking> <thumpa-thumpa-
>> thumpa>"
>>
>> Is there *more* than one?
>
>I own several hundred rap CDs and not one track on any of them
>even approximately answers that description. You're just making
>yourself look silly.
>
>
>Alec
Interesting. That's the only rap song I ever hear as well. It's
really hard to tell, though, because it's always played at a volume
that makes the rear-view mirror in MY car vibrate, and when I get a
block or two away, about all I can hear is the bass.
Jen Davis
> > Both you and Shawn Wilson seem to feel that unless I possess a wide-
> > ranging collection of rap, and have spent untold hours engaged in
> > "critical listening" to that malign thumping & male-ego-prating, I fail
> > the portfolio test and am somehow not *allowed* to criticize that awful
> > crap.
>
> NO ONE IS TELLING YOU THAT YOU NEED TO BUY AND LOVE RAP MUSIC--all they're
> saying is that you're wrong when you say that rap ISN'T music, and they're
> right--there's no denying it.
No? Hey, watch me deny it: "I hereby deny that I'm wrong about rap."
But I'll go further than that; I'll offer counter-reasoning that refutes
your argument: "I'm right. *You're* wrong. Ain't no denyin' it." Now
that we've achieved assertional parity ...
You're even wrong about what you guys are saying. You *are* telling me
that I need to "experience" rap crap before I can make the judgement that
it's not music.
Watch as I catch you red-handed:
> > But don't imagine my experience is too limited. Since rap is so closely
> > associated with race, you have to qualifications of a wholly different
> > nature to appreciate what it feels like to have every man (black or
> > white) you're out with slap on his "Trash-Talkaz Wid 'Tude" disk just
> > because you're a city girl with nappy hair.
>
> Helluva lot of experience there, I bet...
Ding!
Another sarcastic reference to my desperate need to have lots and lots
and lots and lots of "experience" with (c)rap before I can dismiss it as
non-music.
Don't hold your breath.
--
Jennifer C. Davis
<if I needed email, you'd have my address already>
#
"Come to think of it, there are already a million
monkeys on a million typewriters, and Usenet is
NOTHING like Shakespeare."
-- Blair Houghton
Jake Schmidt
> Jake Schmidt (tool...@home.com) writes;
>
> > > Both you and Shawn Wilson seem to feel that unless I possess a wide-
> > > ranging collection of rap, and have spent untold hours engaged in
> > > "critical listening" to that malign thumping & male-ego-prating, I
fail
> > > the portfolio test and am somehow not *allowed* to criticize that
awful
> > > crap.
> >
> > NO ONE IS TELLING YOU THAT YOU NEED TO BUY AND LOVE RAP MUSIC--all
they're
> > saying is that you're wrong when you say that rap ISN'T music, and
they're
> > right--there's no denying it.
>
> No? Hey, watch me deny it: "I hereby deny that I'm wrong about rap."
> But I'll go further than that; I'll offer counter-reasoning that refutes
> your argument: "I'm right. *You're* wrong. Ain't no denyin' it." Now
> that we've achieved assertional parity ...
I just looked up the word "music" at www.m-w.com . I would suggest you do
the same, unless you don't think rap is made up of "...order[ed] tones and
sounds in succession..."
> You're even wrong about what you guys are saying. You *are* telling me
> that I need to "experience" rap crap before I can make the judgement that
> it's not music.
You don't need to experience ANYTHING to not like it. If I don't want to eat
pumpkin pie because of the way it looks, that's my choice. You choose to not
like rap. That's perfectly OK--but you look like a moron when you claim that
it's not music.
> Watch as I catch you red-handed:
I can't wait.
> > > But don't imagine my experience is too limited. Since rap is so
closely
> > > associated with race, you have to qualifications of a wholly different
> > > nature to appreciate what it feels like to have every man (black or
> > > white) you're out with slap on his "Trash-Talkaz Wid 'Tude" disk just
> > > because you're a city girl with nappy hair.
> >
> > Helluva lot of experience there, I bet...
>
> Ding!
Is dinner done?
> Another sarcastic reference to my desperate need to have lots and lots
> and lots and lots of "experience" with (c)rap before I can dismiss it as
> non-music.
Show me where I said that you need to have a lot of experience. I implied
that you didn't have a lot of experience with rap, but I'm not going to hide
the fact that you don't need a lot of experience to form a judgment--which
you're allowed to do.
> Don't hold your breath.
I wouldn't for someone that seems rather hoity-toity because she's a black
woman who doesn't like rap music. Do you want a prize or something?
> --
> Jennifer C. Davis
> <if I needed email, you'd have my address already>
> #
> "Come to think of it, there are already a million
> monkeys on a million typewriters, and Usenet is
> NOTHING like Shakespeare."
> -- Blair Houghton
--
Jake Schmidt
Remove a "d" to reply...
Alec Horgan
> Both you and Shawn Wilson seem to feel that unless I possess a wide-
> ranging collection of rap, and have spent untold hours engaged in
> "critical listening" to that malign thumping & male-ego-prating, I fail
> the portfolio test and am somehow not *allowed* to criticize that awful
> crap.
You're allowed to do whatever you want. But if you remain
in a state of willful ignorance, your criticisms will be
taken as what they are: the prattlings of a know-nothing.
> To this, I'm tempted to tap your cranium and ask if anyone's home; do you
> seriously expect people to rush out and start avidly listening to the
> very garbage that threatens to spill their gorge - perhaps purchase a
> large discography to support their opinion?
Of course not. If you don't like it, by all means don't
buy it. You do not, in fact, need to support your opinion
at all. (Indeed, you don't even need to share your
opinion, but that's another matter.)
This isn't really very complicated. For example, I don't
like Tuvan throat-singing; it just grates on me.
Consequently I don't listen to much and don't intend to.
So, when I'm asked my opinion of Tuvan throat-singing, I
say something like, "The little I've heard really didn't
appeal to me, so I never explored it further." That's my
opinion, and, while it's based on limited exposure, it's
perfectly valid. This is because I don't represent my
opinion as anything more than it is: I don't pretend to be
knowledgable, I don't dismiss the entire genre out of hand
or pretend that my dislike evidences something wrong with
the music, and I don't couch my opinion in terms of easily-
falsifiable "facts" (e.g., all Tuvan throat-singing is
terrible, it all sounds the same, it's not even music, etc.).
Alec
Alec Horgan
> David Barr writes:
> > I was CFO of the label that put out Naughty By Nature's records ...
> > we made up promotional T-shirts featuring the phrase "Down With O.P.P.".
> > ... Apparently, those people [in Canada] thought the T-shirt was an
> > attack on the Ontario Provincial Police rather than an expression of
> > approval of the idea of sleeping with someone else's girlfriend (or of
> > being the participating GF).
>
> Not surprising. So, what were the initials intended to stand for?
O is for Other, P is for People's, scratch your temple
The last P, well, that's not so simple
It's sorta like, well, another way to call a cat a kitten
Alec
Jen Davis
> > No? Hey, watch me deny it: "I hereby deny that I'm wrong about rap."
> > But I'll go further than that; I'll offer counter-reasoning that refutes
> > your argument: "I'm right. *You're* wrong. Ain't no denyin' it." Now
> > that we've achieved assertional parity ...
>
> I just looked up the word "music" at www.m-w.com . I would suggest you do
> the same, unless you don't think rap is made up of "...order[ed] tones and
> sounds in succession..."
I think the sounds that come from the freeway at night qualify as
"ordered tones and sounds in succession," but I'm still going to argue
that they don't represent "music." Now that I think about it, there are
all sorts of things (crickets, wind, running water) that aren't "music,"
but are much less annoying examples of "ordered tones" and "sounds in
succession"--yet don't seem to be included in any definition of music.
> > Don't hold your breath.
>
> I wouldn't for someone that seems rather hoity-toity because she's a black
> woman who doesn't like rap music. Do you want a prize or something?
No. Not at all. In fact, the only reason I brought up trivia like my
own color was that one poster was voicing more than a mere suspicion that
those who dislike rap are doing so for racist reasons of disliking
"blackness." While I'm probably as much the racist as the next person,
it seems unlikely I would hold racist views against my own race.
Jen Davis
> > Both you and Shawn Wilson seem to feel that unless I possess a wide-
> > ranging collection of rap, and have spent untold hours engaged in
> > "critical listening" to that malign thumping & male-ego-prating, I fail
> > the portfolio test and am somehow not *allowed* to criticize that awful
> > crap.
>
> You're allowed to do whatever you want. But if you remain
> in a state of willful ignorance, your criticisms will be
> taken as what they are: the prattlings of a know-nothing.
So, my choices are:
1. Remain in willful ignorance of that ugly, nasty noise I detest, and
be thought a prattling know-nothing should I voice my opinion.
2. Start listening to (c)rap all the time, and have a firm foundation
under me should I decide to opine that (c)rap is ugly, nasty noise.
Something tells me my next stop isn't going to be Sam Goody's.
> > To this, I'm tempted to tap your cranium and ask if anyone's home; do you
> > seriously expect people to rush out and start avidly listening to the
> > very garbage that threatens to spill their gorge - perhaps purchase a
> > large discography to support their opinion?
>
> Of course not. If you don't like it, by all means don't
> buy it. You do not, in fact, need to support your opinion
> at all. (Indeed, you don't even need to share your
> opinion, but that's another matter.)
Well, then, what's the problem? If you think rap is music, then knock
yourself out. I think it's noise.
> This isn't really very complicated. For example, I don't
> like Tuvan throat-singing; it just grates on me.
> Consequently I don't listen to much and don't intend to.
> So, when I'm asked my opinion of Tuvan throat-singing, I
> say something like, "The little I've heard really didn't
> appeal to me, so I never explored it further." That's my
> opinion, and, while it's based on limited exposure, it's
> perfectly valid. This is because I don't represent my
> opinion as anything more than it is: I don't pretend to be
> knowledgable, I don't dismiss the entire genre out of hand
> or pretend that my dislike evidences something wrong with
> the music, and I don't couch my opinion in terms of easily-
> falsifiable "facts" (e.g., all Tuvan throat-singing is
> terrible, it all sounds the same, it's not even music, etc.).
First off, let me just point out that were you continually subjected, by
virtue of our un-mutable popular culture, to a ceaseless cacophony of
Tuvan throat-singing--on the street, on buses, from the next apartment,
from other people in social situations--you might abandon your studied,
academic disdain for the genre and join me in taking a more militant
line. Indeed, you might consider whether you're even qualified to gauge
your true disliking for Tuvan throat-singing until you're trapped next to
a "boom-car" blasting it into your ears at 155 decibels.
Secondly, I'm going to assume that we're all old enough to understand
that every post on usenet is suffixed by the Dennis Millerian phrase, "Of
course, that's just my opinion; I could be wrong." I'm not pretending
that my opinions were especially "knowledgeable," except in the sense
that each person is perfectly qualified to judge whether something [in
their opinion] represents "music."
Big Iron5
>Secondly, I'm going to assume that we're all old enough to understand
>that every post on usenet is suffixed by the Dennis Millerian phrase, "Of
>course, that's just my opinion; I could be wrong."
As to assertions of fact? Of course not.
> I'm not pretending
>that my opinions were especially "knowledgeable," except in the sense
>that each person is perfectly qualified to judge whether something [in
>their opinion] represents "music."
Of course, as to whether it constitutes good/enjoyable music. Whether it is
"music" at all is, for the most part, a question of fact, not opinion.
Alec Horgan
> > You're allowed to do whatever you want. But if you remain
> > in a state of willful ignorance, your criticisms will be
> > taken as what they are: the prattlings of a know-nothing.
> So, my choices are:
>
> 1. Remain in willful ignorance of that ugly, nasty noise I detest, and
> be thought a prattling know-nothing should I voice my opinion.
>
> 2. Start listening to (c)rap all the time, and have a firm foundation
> under me should I decide to opine that (c)rap is ugly, nasty noise.
No, there is, as I've said repeatedly, a third and
perfectly respectable option. Just say, "I don't like
rap." It's quite possible to personally dislike
something without maligning it or misrepresenting it
via sweeping falsehoods and strawmen. This, in fact, is
the way civilized and open-minded people who don't have
an agenda tend to discuss such matters.
> > Of course not. If you don't like it, by all means don't
> > buy it. You do not, in fact, need to support your opinion
> > at all. (Indeed, you don't even need to share your
> > opinion, but that's another matter.)
>
> Well, then, what's the problem?
I've made the problem explicit several times now, and
I honestly can't tell whether you're simply not getting
it or deliberately ignoring it. If you don't like rap,
that's your business. But the things you've said about
it are obviously and demonstrably false. Perhaps you do
not see this as a problem, but I regard it as rather
troublesome.
And all your whining about being helplessly subjected to
it by the evil overlords of pop culture and delinquent
homeboys is irrelevant to a discussion of the music qua
music. If you want to debate the merits of hip-hop
culture more generally we could do that as well, although
I suspect it would grow equally tiresome, but it's got
precious little to do with the music as such. What you're
saying would be rather like someone saying "I don't like
country music because I hate rednecks" or "I don't like
dance music because I don't like people who go to raves
and take ecstasy." Whatever the merits of objections to
those groups, they don't constitute legitimate reasons
for dismissal of the music associated with them.
I also hope that you realize that in your zeal to dismiss
rap from the realm of legitmate music, you've also,
inadvertently or not, also written off a very large
portion of music with a much more established pedigree.
John Zorn, for instance, might be interested to learn
that by your definition he is apparently not a musician.
Alec
Opus the Penguin
>No she didn't. She may have described the way rap music
>is perceived by someone with a closed mind or a
>predisposition to dislike it, but it's nothing more than
>an uninformed and dishonest caricature.
I thought Jen's reply was pretty funny. And it was an accurate
representation of the way rap music sounds to a lot of us. There's nothing
dishonest about that.
--
Opus the Penguin
Opus the Penguin
>You don't need to experience ANYTHING to not like it. If I don't want to
>eat pumpkin pie because of the way it looks, that's my choice.
Let's run with that. Here's the way this conversation sounds to me (and I
realize it sounds totally different to those on the other side, kind of like
rap itself):
Jen: I don't like pumpkin pie. It tastes like dog poop.
Opponent: There are lots of different kinds of pumpkin pie. How can you make
a generalization like that? You must be a stupid imbecile.
Jen: I've tasted the kind of pumpkin pie that tastes like dog poop. Is there
another kind? [Editor's note: She's being flippant. This is funny. People
who agree that pumpkin pie tastes like dog poop will laugh. People who LOVE
pumpkin pie but aren't worried if other people don't will also laugh. People
who are for some reason offended by the non-love of pumpkin pie will
recognize the flippancy and be very upset.]
Opponent: Now you're just showing what an immature little baby butthead
pooty pants you are. Pumpkin pie tastes nothing like dog poop. You are being
dishonest if you say that's the way it tastes to you. You are not accurately
describing your own sensory perceptions in this matter because it is
impossible that you should perceive ANY pumpkin pie in this way. And
furthermore, even if you did, that wouldn't mean that ALL pumpkin pie is
like that. I have personally tried over 100 different kinds of pumpkin pie.
Why? Because I LOVE pumpkin pie. What does this mean? It means that only *I*
am qualified to decide whether pumpkin pie is any good or not. YOU may not
do so unless you buy 100 different kinds of a pie that you hate and that
tastes like dog poop to you. Until then your assertion is totally invalid
and you are a complete moron and you ought to be drawn and quartered and the
pieces of you dragged through streets that are covered with REAL dog poop
and your relatives should be executed on national television because nothing
you say makes sense and you probably are ugly and my mother told me not to
associate with lowlife scumbags like yourself and I have judged you to be a
lowlife scumbag on the basis of my ridiculous over-analysis of a handful of
your posts and despite the fact that it may appear that by this I am
committing the very fallacy of over-generalization that I accuse YOU of, I
stand firm by the moral principle that I am right and you are wrong and
neener neener neener. Slobber. Pant. Druel.
Jen: Gimme a break.
--
Opus the Penguin
Jen Davis
> No, there is, as I've said repeatedly, a third and
> perfectly respectable option. Just say, "I don't like
> rap." It's quite possible to personally dislike
> something without maligning it or misrepresenting it
> via sweeping falsehoods and strawmen. This, in fact, is
> the way civilized and open-minded people who don't have
> an agenda tend to discuss such matters.
But I'd like to do so much *more* than simply malign it. I'd like to
erase it completely--or just make it a capital crime to publicly inflict
it upon someone who detests it.
> If you don't like rap,
> that's your business. But the things you've said about
> it are obviously and demonstrably false. Perhaps you do
> not see this as a problem, but I regard it as rather
> troublesome.
If it would help you if I tacked, "in my opinion," on as a suffix
whenever I say, "rap isn't music," you are at your liberty to mentally
fill in this phrase.
> And all your whining about being helplessly subjected to
> it by the evil overlords of pop culture and delinquent
> homeboys is irrelevant to a discussion of the music qua
> music.
Well, it was a single paragraph, but if you prefer to inflate that into a
significant instance of "all that whining," then you'll have to do a bit
more mental insertion. The point I was making was quite simple (as well
as non-whining); you might feel differently about forms of music you
dislike if you were continually bombarded by them.
> I also hope that you realize that in your zeal to dismiss
> rap from the realm of legitmate music, you've also,
> inadvertently or not, also written off a very large
> portion of music with a much more established pedigree.
> John Zorn, for instance, might be interested to learn
> that by your definition he is apparently not a musician.
Is John Zorn a Tuvan throat-singer?
Opus the Penguin
>No, there is, as I've said repeatedly, a third and
>perfectly respectable option. Just say, "I don't like
>rap." It's quite possible to personally dislike
>something without maligning it or misrepresenting it
>via sweeping falsehoods and strawmen. This, in fact, is
>the way civilized and open-minded people who don't have
>an agenda tend to discuss such matters.
And, Alec, don't you think you might be "misrepresenting [Jen's position]
via sweeping falsehoods and strawmen"? It certainly seems that might be the
case to me.
--
Opus the Penguin
Alec Horgan
My purpose in continuing with this thread, one which I
otherwise would have abandoned some time ago, has been
to see if I couldn't get her to clarify that position
in the event that I was indeed misunderstanding, but
she's responded with increasing stridency and the
continual advancement of claims -- claims of fact, not
opinion -- that are quite simply not true and full of
needlessly loaded language. If you wish to chalk this
up to hyperbole or attempted humor, very well, but I am
not, as the English say, finding it all that bloody
funny.
But I'm also trying to make a larger point. Namely,
when I first encountered rap I was inclined to react
similarly to Jen. But because I try to maintain an
open mind I made a concerted effort to appreciate it,
and my musical and cultural life has been considerably
enriched for it. This is true, by the way, not just of
rap, but many other styles of music and art as well.
Indeed, my interest in this thread has little to do with
rap per se. I am not, as you charge in another post,
much of a rap "lover," nor do I ordinarily feel much
compulsion to defend it. What irks me here is the
deliberate and almost gleeful displays of ignorance.
My ire would have been similarly aroused whether the
particular subject was avant jazz, klezmer, or Javanese
gamelan music.
Finally, in her attempts to dismiss rap as mere "noise,"
Jen has in effect turned the debate into one whose
provenance is considerably farther-reaching, one that
cuts to the very core of questions about the nature and
essence of art. This is a nontrivial topic and one
that isn't done justice by the pithy pronouncements of
soi-disant wits.
Alec
Jen Davis
> >No, there is, as I've said repeatedly, a third and
> >perfectly respectable option. Just say, "I don't like
> >rap." It's quite possible to personally dislike
> >something without maligning it or misrepresenting it
> >via sweeping falsehoods and strawmen. This, in fact, is
> >the way civilized and open-minded people who don't have
> >an agenda tend to discuss such matters.
>
> And, Alec, don't you think you might be "misrepresenting [Jen's position]
> via sweeping falsehoods and strawmen"? It certainly seems that might be the
> case to me.
The whole reason I got into this thread was my dislike of the idea that
there's something malignantly anti-black in the suggestion that "rap
isn't music." And Alec has displayed a tendency to perpetuate this point
by expanding my rather simple assertion ("I don't think rap is music at
all.") into a much grander indictment of cultural issues having racial
overtones:
> If you want to debate the merits of hip-hop
> culture more generally we could do that as well, although
> I suspect it would grow equally tiresome, but it's got
> precious little to do with the music as such.
To this, I can only say, "I agree it's got precious little to do with
music, which is why I didn't bring it up." My only mention of rap in the
cultural context was to point out how difficult it is to avoid having it
pounding in my years in public or social situations. In other words, I
said I don't like being stuck in a traffic jam next to a boom-car
blasting rap, and Alec read into this a blanket indictment of "hip-hop
culture."
He continues:
> What you're
> saying would be rather like someone saying "I don't like
> country music because I hate rednecks" or "I don't like
> dance music because I don't like people who go to raves
> and take ecstasy."
Why can't I just be saying "I don't think rap is music," without somehow
secretly, covertly, and (I guess) unconsciously saying, "because I hate
blacks?"
Jen Davis
> But I'm also trying to make a larger point. Namely,
> when I first encountered rap I was inclined to react
> similarly to Jen. But because I try to maintain an
> open mind I made a concerted effort to appreciate it,
> and my musical and cultural life has been considerably
> enriched for it.
Oh, please! Don't even try to hand me this "If only poor, ignorant Jen
would just *really listen* to rap, she'd find her toes starting to tap
and her mojo startin' to flow" line. I have listened to it. It's ugly,
nasty noise.
> This is true, by the way, not just of
> rap, but many other styles of music and art as well.
In your opinion, is it possible to well and truly give something a fair
hearing (or viewing, or whatever) and make an honest decision that it
fails to meet the test? Or are we all pretty much forced to toe the
official line once the powers-that-be have declared something "music" or
"art?"
> What irks me here is the
> deliberate and almost gleeful displays of ignorance.
Over and over, you return to the same lame assertion; that a loathing of
rap must be chalked up to "ignorance." Couldn't a loathing of rap stem
from "experience?"
> Finally, in her attempts to dismiss rap as mere "noise,"
> Jen has in effect turned the debate into one whose
> provenance is considerably farther-reaching, one that
> cuts to the very core of questions about the nature and
> essence of art.
Do you think *everything* which conventional wisdom holds out to us as
art is, in fact, art? Can you name a single thing that the conventional
wisdom imagines is art, but that Alec Horgan, in his wise, experienced,
open-minded way has tested, but found wanting?
Jen Davis
> Jen "I hate Pumpkin pie, it's not food."
>
> Whoever: You know, Pumpkin pie fits into any reasonable definition of food,
> even if you don't like it.
Actually, it goes:
Jen: "I hate pumpkin pie, it's not food."
Whoever: "It is *so* food! It says so in my Big Book Of Food. You're
just *ignorant*! You haven't really *experienced* pumpkin pie."
Jen: "I most certainly have. I always puke it right back up. So it
ain't food to my body--it's poison."
Whoever: "But we all think it's food! You must secretly hate pilgrims!"
Jen: "I am a pilgrim. A card-carrying, silver-buckled, blunderbuss-
totin' ur-pilgrim. But pumpkin pie still makes me upchuck."
Randy Poe
>I think the sounds that come from the freeway at night qualify as
>"ordered tones and sounds in succession," but I'm still going to argue
>that they don't represent "music." Now that I think about it, there are
>all sorts of things (crickets, wind, running water) that aren't "music,"
>but are much less annoying examples of "ordered tones" and "sounds in
>succession"--yet don't seem to be included in any definition of music.
I'm with you in this discussion, but unfortunately many 20th-century
classical composers (John Cage comes to mind) stretched the definition
of music in similar ways, including the things you mention as well as
all sorts of other strange sounds. I would go along with you and say
that this type of stuff is also not music. Unfortunately a lot of it
has been performed in concert halls and gushed over by critics.
Rap music I have been exposed to recently includes an instrumental
accompaniment and sometimes a sung refrain. Or maybe the sung refrain
makes it hip-hop. I'm not clear on the distinction and I'm not really
interested. But the stuff I first heard does indeed sound like
<thumpa-thumpa-thumpa> (monotone shouted poem, with or without violent
lyrics), where <thumpa-thumpa-thumpa> indicates rhythmic sound
effects, but only vaguely tonal in the sense that an electric arc or a
construction site is tonal.
But getting back to "classical" music, I once sat through a
performance of a godawful thing called "Pierrot" (Schoenberg?), if
memory serves, which consisted of a very violent and bizarre (German?)
poem being "declaimed" (spoken in a strange sing-song) by a solo
singer, a very talented and nationally-known soprano of our
acquaintance who unfortunately has a love of "new music".
I'm not sure I see a big difference between that and <thumpa-thumpa>.
- Randy
Dutch Courage
>But I'd like to do so much *more* than simply malign it.
I don't particularly enjoy gay porn, but I don't want it eliminated.
> I'd like to
>erase it completely--or just make it a capital crime to publicly inflict
>it upon someone who detests it.
>If it would help you if I tacked, "in my opinion," on as a suffix
>whenever I say, "rap isn't music," you are at your liberty to mentally
>fill in this phrase.
No, because what is and isn't music isn't especially a matter of opinion.
I know, I know...
"Chihuahuas aren't dogs."
"I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn
human actions, but to understand them" -Spinoza
"The ridiculing and scorn, that's just gravy."-Courage
Dutch Courage
>Jake Schmidt wrote:
>>You don't need to experience ANYTHING to not like it. If I don't want to
>>eat pumpkin pie because of the way it looks, that's my choice.
>
>Let's run with that. Here's the way this conversation sounds to me (and I
>realize it sounds totally different to those on the other side, kind of like
>rap itself):
No no no...jeez, can't you play at analogies? do I have to do everything?
Jen "I hate Pumpkin pie, it's not food."
Whoever: You know, Pumpkin pie fits into any reasonable definition of food,
even if you don't like it.
Jen: Nuh-uh! I hate pumpkin pie. All the damn pilgrims are eating it.
Whoever: Whyn't you just say it's not food you like?
Jen: I don't have to and you can't make me!
Dutch Courage
>The whole reason I got into this thread was my dislike of the idea that
>there's something malignantly anti-black in the suggestion that "rap
>isn't music."
I still wonder why rap invites such ire, and, I dunno, polka doesn't.
BTW, Baldwin, is that you in the tuxedo? Aren't you glomming onto Looney's
shtick?
Jake Schmidt
<snip>
> First off, let me just point out that were you continually subjected, by
> virtue of our un-mutable popular culture, to a ceaseless cacophony of
> Tuvan throat-singing--on the street, on buses, from the next apartment,
> from other people in social situations--you might abandon your studied,
> academic disdain for the genre and join me in taking a more militant
> line. Indeed, you might consider whether you're even qualified to gauge
> your true disliking for Tuvan throat-singing until you're trapped next to
> a "boom-car" blasting it into your ears at 155 decibels.
So get mad at the "boom car", not the music. FWIW, remind me to crank
whatever I'm playing next time I pull up next to you...
> Secondly, I'm going to assume that we're all old enough to understand
> that every post on usenet is suffixed by the Dennis Millerian phrase, "Of
> course, that's just my opinion; I could be wrong." I'm not pretending
> that my opinions were especially "knowledgeable," except in the sense
> that each person is perfectly qualified to judge whether something [in
> their opinion] represents "music."
Sorry. That's like me trying to convince the rest of AFCA that the
definition of "the" is cat. The English language doesn't work like that.
> --
> Jennifer C. Davis
> <if I needed email, you'd have my address already>
> #
> "Come to think of it, there are already a million
> monkeys on a million typewriters, and Usenet is
> NOTHING like Shakespeare."
> -- Blair Houghton
--
Dutch Courage
>It's ugly,
>nasty noise.
I dunno, the sugarhill gang is pretty fun, and man, wasn't the Chronic cool?
Oh, sure, Dre has his gangsta floss, but so did Sinatra.
Dutch Courage
>Dutch Courage (hpstr...@aol.commissar) writes;
>
>> Jen "I hate Pumpkin pie, it's not food."
>>
>> Whoever: You know, Pumpkin pie fits into any reasonable definition of
>food,
>> even if you don't like it.
>
>Actually, it goes:
>
>Jen: "I hate pumpkin pie, it's not food."
>
>Whoever: "It is *so* food! It says so in my Big Book Of Food. You're
>just *ignorant*! You haven't really *experienced* pumpkin pie."
>
>Jen: "I most certainly have. I always puke it right back up. So it
>ain't food to my body--it's poison."
I really don't think it's poison. That is, although you wouldn't enjoy the
experience, i doubt you would die from eating it.. It might not be food you
enjoy, but again, pumpkin pie would fit any reasonable definition of food,
outside of some figurative "Tony Danza isn't an actor"
Tony Danza is not an actor~=Tony Danza is not a good actor~=Tony Danza is not
an actor I enjoy, again, outside of some figurative hyperboyle.
And really, Rap is such a broad genre, I don't know how you can say its all
one thing. Loud, or violent, or anti-woman, or whatever. This, in fact, seems
you're reacting to something other than the musicality of it.
>
>Whoever: "But we all think it's food! You must secretly hate pilgrims!"
>
>Jen: "I am a pilgrim. A card-carrying, silver-buckled, blunderbuss-
>totin' ur-pilgrim.
You know, I am pretty sure you did say something about how you hated all the
big Willies listening to it, and making you listen to it, and the booming
systems, and this is a big part of why you hate it so much. I could go look it
up, but I really don't want to.
> But pumpkin pie still makes me upchuck."
I dont like Lima beans[1]. Doesn't make them not food, I figure.
I also wonder why people who don't like Lima beans have to volunteer this
information with such hyperboyle, and people who don't like, I dunno, hamhocks
just go "I don't like hamhocks" when they speak up about it at all.
Dutch "Have you ever went over a friend's house to eat, and the food just ain't
no good?" Courage
[1] I haven't had them in awhile, and I've become less of a fussy eater than i
was when I was six, so maybe I do like them, I dunno. I think you still get the
idea.
Jake Schmidt
> Dutch Courage (hpstr...@aol.commissar) writes;
>
> > Jen "I hate Pumpkin pie, it's not food."
> >
> > Whoever: You know, Pumpkin pie fits into any reasonable definition of
food,
> > even if you don't like it.
>
> Actually, it goes:
>
> Jen: "I hate pumpkin pie, it's not food."
>
> Whoever: "It is *so* food! It says so in my Big Book Of Food. You're
> just *ignorant*! You haven't really *experienced* pumpkin pie."
>
> Jen: "I most certainly have. I always puke it right back up. So it
> ain't food to my body--it's poison."
>
>
> Jen: "I am a pilgrim. A card-carrying, silver-buckled, blunderbuss-
Coconut cream pie makes me upchuck--but it's still food. It certainly isn't
poison.
Jake Schmidt
news:20000228002212...@ng-cf1.aol.com...
<snip>
> I also wonder why people who don't like Lima beans have to volunteer this
> information with such hyperboyle, and people who don't like, I dunno,
hamhocks
> just go "I don't like hamhocks" when they speak up about it at all.
>
> Dutch "Have you ever went over a friend's house to eat, and the food just
ain't
> no good?" Courage
You made me laugh--that hasn't happened in a while. Since I've had a few
drinks in me, I'll tell you that [1] right when I think you couldn't do
anything stupider, you go and do something like this and totally redeem
yourself.
<snip>
[1] Extra points if you can name the movie this is from...
"I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to
scorn
> human actions, but to understand them" -Spinoza
>
> "The ridiculing and scorn, that's just gravy."-Courage
--
David Zeiger
>Over and over, you return to the same lame assertion; that a loathing of
>rap must be chalked up to "ignorance." Couldn't a loathing of rap stem
>from "experience?"
Sure, but you've made it an overwhelming point in this thread
that you don't *have* experience, in any meaningful sense of
the term with regards to this discussion. You can't have
it both ways--if you claim that you neither want or need
lots of experience in listening to rap to decide that it's
bad, then you can't turn around and claim that your opinions
are based on experience.
Then again, "meaningful sense of the term" doesn't seem to
apply very well, based on the bizarre subjective definition
you're giving to "music" (<thread merge> A is A, dammit!
</thread merge>), so perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you
mean by experience.
Since your definitions of even (IMHO) basic terms like "music"
are at odds from those given in dictionaries (not to mention
the vast majority of those reading/posting), perhaps you
should consider appending every post with a glossary of terms
used.
--
David Zeiger dze...@the-institute.net
Whenever I find myself in a difficult situation, I ask myself "What
Would Jesus Do?" The mental image of my opposition being cast into
pits of hellfire for all eternity *is* comforting, but probably not
what the inventors of the phrase had in mind.
Jake Schmidt
news:3CCC95D25040D4E3.89D1BAE2...@lp.airnews.net...
<snip>
> Since your definitions of even (IMHO) basic terms like "music"
> are at odds from those given in dictionaries (not to mention
> the vast majority of those reading/posting), perhaps you
> should consider appending every post with a glossary of terms
> used.
I thought of something similar, but every thread in AFCA would end with
someone claiming that their definition is something different than everyone
else's, and we'd all get nowhere...
> --
> David Zeiger dze...@the-institute.net
> Whenever I find myself in a difficult situation, I ask myself "What
> Would Jesus Do?" The mental image of my opposition being cast into
> pits of hellfire for all eternity *is* comforting, but probably not
> what the inventors of the phrase had in mind.
--
Jake "we don't get anywhere the way it is" Schmidt
Jeff Janes
: I still wonder why rap invites such ire, and, I dunno, polka doesn't.
Well, accordions sure seem to.
: "The ridiculing and scorn, that's just gravy."-Courage
Um, um, good.
--
Jeff Janes
email: ja...@scripps.edu
Alec Horgan
> Well, it was a single paragraph, but if you prefer to inflate that into a
> significant instance of "all that whining," then you'll have to do a bit
> more mental insertion. The point I was making was quite simple (as well
> as non-whining); you might feel differently about forms of music you
> dislike if you were continually bombarded by them.
And if you were genuinely bombarded by music at 155
decibels, you'd have little cause for complaint about
its obtrusiveness, as you'd be irrevocably deaf.
> > John Zorn, for instance, might be interested to learn
> > that by your definition he is apparently not a musician.
>
> Is John Zorn a Tuvan throat-singer?
Far from it.
Alec
Alec Horgan
> Oh, please! Don't even try to hand me this "If only poor, ignorant Jen
> would just *really listen* to rap, she'd find her toes starting to tap
> and her mojo startin' to flow" line. I have listened to it. It's ugly,
> nasty noise.
I am, genuinely, sorry that you feel that way.
> > This is true, by the way, not just of
> > rap, but many other styles of music and art as well.
>
> In your opinion, is it possible to well and truly give something a fair
> hearing (or viewing, or whatever) and make an honest decision that it
> fails to meet the test? Or are we all pretty much forced to toe the
> official line once the powers-that-be have declared something "music" or
> "art?"
The "powers-that-be," whoever they may be, have
absolutely nothing to do with it.
> > What irks me here is the
> > deliberate and almost gleeful displays of ignorance.
>
> Over and over, you return to the same lame assertion; that a loathing of
> rap must be chalked up to "ignorance." Couldn't a loathing of rap stem
> from "experience?"
It could, and, as I've already said, one who was
experienced could offer a lucid and potentially
devastating critique of rap. You, however, are,
by your own admission, not such a person.
> > Finally, in her attempts to dismiss rap as mere "noise,"
> > Jen has in effect turned the debate into one whose
> > provenance is considerably farther-reaching, one that
> > cuts to the very core of questions about the nature and
> > essence of art.
>
> Do you think *everything* which conventional wisdom holds out to us as
> art is, in fact, art?
I have no idea what "conventional wisdom" is, and
little more interest in its declarations.
> Can you name a single thing that the conventional
> wisdom imagines is art, but that Alec Horgan, in his wise, experienced,
> open-minded way has tested, but found wanting?
As I've already made quite clear, if I dislike
something I will say so. I will not, however,
question its legitimacy or its artistic viability.
The relevant point was made quite elegantly by Frank
Zappa in his autobiography when he said (and I'm
quoting from memory, but this is very close) that
"the most important aspect of art is the frame."
By which he meant that what what makes a particular
item art is not some essential feature of the piece,
but the decision on the part of the artist to
designate it as such, to frame it and set it apart
from all the non-art in the world.
To borrow from your "noise" example, the sounds of
traffic aren't music, but if one were to record them
and use them for the backing track of a rap song,
they would be. The critical aspect is
intentionality. This is why Duchamp's toilet is art,
and why everything from Cage's "4'33" to the most
tuneless twelve-tone row to, yes, rap, is music.
Alec
Gary S. Callison
: Dutch Courage (hpstr...@aol.commissar) writes;
: > >OTOH, personal taste in music does not reflect one's attitude about
: > >racial matters, either.
: > Well, to me it depends on how you express that sentiment. Do you say
: > "I don't like rap," or "Rap isn't music"? Some people don't like
: > Beethoven, I guess. Would you take them seriously if they said
: > "Beethoven isn't music"? Sure, a lot of rap isn't very good, but then
: > some classical music is less than creative. Vivaldi kind of sucks,
: > for instance, and, say, Ravel. So I do kind of wonder what's up with
: > that, why rap inspires such ire, and if it's not tied to the
: > blackness of it all after all.
: I think rap isn't music. I'm also black.
: Am I a racist?
:
: > > ISTR you calling me a racist last time the
: > >subject of (c)rap "music" came up.
: > One wonders why you're so touchy about this.
: You wonder why someone is touchy about being called a racist? Where have
: you spent the last 25 years? Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan?
Hey! I'll have you know that I'm _from_ Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, and I
resent the implication here! I'll have you know that Moose Jaw is every
bit as racially diverse and politically aware as any other northern Canada
plains city!
--
FunkMaster DJ Fresh Jazzy Puff Moe G Food Stamps
David Samuel Barr
>
> Rap music I have been exposed to recently includes an instrumental
> accompaniment and sometimes a sung refrain. Or maybe the sung refrain
> makes it hip-hop. I'm not clear on the distinction and I'm not really
> interested. But the stuff I first heard does indeed sound like
> <thumpa-thumpa-thumpa> (monotone shouted poem, with or without violent
> lyrics), where <thumpa-thumpa-thumpa> indicates rhythmic sound
> effects, but only vaguely tonal in the sense that an electric arc or a
> construction site is tonal.
>From its earliest days rap has always had music as a primary component.
That's why you always had at least an MC (the vocalist) and a DJ (who
provided the music, usually from records on turntables). Rap that had
only rhythmic-noise backgrounds (usually from vocal percussion) was
performed in instances when instruments and/or turntables/boomboxes/etc
weren't available, and so was almost antithetical to the point of making
rap records. A MC's skills were measured by the creativity of his
lyrics, a DJ's by the creativity of his selecting and mixing musical
excerpts as suitable backdrops. I used to attend competitions that were
the rap equivalent of old rock & roll "battles of the bands", and there
was usually some pretty amazing stuff to be heard.
> But getting back to "classical" music, I once sat through a
> performance of a godawful thing called "Pierrot" (Schoenberg?), if
> memory serves, which consisted of a very violent and bizarre (German?)
> poem being "declaimed" (spoken in a strange sing-song) by a solo
> singer, a very talented and nationally-known soprano of our
> acquaintance who unfortunately has a love of "new music".
"Pierrot Lunaire", Op. 21, by Arnold Schoenberg, who is primarily known
as a serialist composer and for the "sprechstimme" style featured in
that piece, although much of his early work (like "Verklaerte Nacht")
sits firmly on a late-Romantic base. The text consists of 21 poems by
Albert Giraud, translated from French to German by Otto Erich
Hartleben. You can see Schoenberg's directions as to how the vocal part
is to be performed at http://www.schoenberg.org/musicfolder/muop21.html
Jen Davis
> >Whoever: "It is *so* food! It says so in my Big Book Of Food. You're
> >just *ignorant*! You haven't really *experienced* pumpkin pie."
> >
> >Jen: "I most certainly have. I always puke it right back up. So it
> >ain't food to my body--it's poison."
>
> I really don't think it's poison. That is, although you wouldn't enjoy the
> experience, i doubt you would die from eating it.. It might not be food you
> enjoy, but again, pumpkin pie would fit any reasonable definition of food,
> outside of some figurative "Tony Danza isn't an actor"
Have you ever seen anyone eat "food" that they're allergic to? Do you
think they would agree that [gunk they're allergic to] is "food?" Or do
you think they'd come down on the "poison" side?
That's how I feel about rap. I'm allergic to that noise.
> I dont like Lima beans[1]. Doesn't make them not food, I figure.
>
> I also wonder why people who don't like Lima beans have to volunteer this
> information with such hyperboyle, and people who don't like, I dunno, hamhocks
> just go "I don't like hamhocks" when they speak up about it at all.
Perhaps if total strangers were in the habit of walking up to you and
inserting lima beans in your mouth, without your permission, you'd adopt
a more militant line with respect to lima beans. Let me know the next
time you attend a party and are forced to eat lima beans throughout the
entire evening, and we can revisit your theory that people should just
accept ugly noise washing over them without comment.
> Dutch "Have you ever went over a friend's house to eat, and the food just ain't
> no good?" Courage
Jen "Sure I have. I can "not eat" food, though. I can't "not hear"
horrible thumping noise at 145 decibels." Davis
Jen Davis
> > Can you name a single thing that the conventional
> > wisdom imagines is art, but that Alec Horgan, in his wise, experienced,
> > open-minded way has tested, but found wanting?
>
> As I've already made quite clear, if I dislike
> something I will say so. I will not, however,
> question its legitimacy or its artistic viability.
So, in your opinion, pretty much *everything* proposed as art or music
qualifies as art or music--you may not like it, but you're unable to make
the judgement that it's not legitimate.
Interesting.
Jen Davis
> : You wonder why someone is touchy about being called a racist? Where have
> : you spent the last 25 years? Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan?
>
> Hey! I'll have you know that I'm _from_ Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, and I
> resent the implication here! I'll have you know that Moose Jaw is every
> bit as racially diverse and politically aware as any other northern Canada
> plains city!
Here in the east, we call Moose Jaw, "Paris of the north."
Jen Davis
> >Over and over, you return to the same lame assertion; that a loathing of
> >rap must be chalked up to "ignorance." Couldn't a loathing of rap stem
> >from "experience?"
>
> Sure, but you've made it an overwhelming point in this thread
> that you don't *have* experience, in any meaningful sense of
> the term with regards to this discussion. You can't have
> it both ways--if you claim that you neither want or need
> lots of experience in listening to rap to decide that it's
> bad, then you can't turn around and claim that your opinions
> are based on experience.
But this is just sophistry. Of course I can have enough experience to
determine that something isn't (tack on IMO if you prefer) music without
listening to it until my bones whiten in the glaring sun (or I'm
considered expert enough to present dissertations on it).
I mean, I have enough experience with respect to falling down to
understand that falling from a 70-story building would be very, very bad-
-without *ever* having experienced exactly that sort of fall. Aren't
there things in your life you have enough experience of to know that you
don't want to ever have another experience of?
> Then again, "meaningful sense of the term" doesn't seem to
> apply very well, based on the bizarre subjective definition
> you're giving to "music" (<thread merge> A is A, dammit!
> </thread merge>), so perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you
> mean by experience.
In actuality, "experience" is nothing more than a red herring you guys
have brought up, since you're all arguing that rap is *objectively*
music--that it's a fact that rap is music.
How could I possibly accumulate enough "experience" to challenge an
objective fact?
> Since your definitions of even (IMHO) basic terms like "music"
> are at odds from those given in dictionaries (not to mention
> the vast majority of those reading/posting), perhaps you
> should consider appending every post with a glossary of terms
> used.
When this becomes required on Usenet, I'll play along with everyone else.
Jen Davis
> > First off, let me just point out that were you continually subjected, by
> > virtue of our un-mutable popular culture, to a ceaseless cacophony of
> > Tuvan throat-singing--on the street, on buses, from the next apartment,
> > from other people in social situations--you might abandon your studied,
> > academic disdain for the genre and join me in taking a more militant
> > line. Indeed, you might consider whether you're even qualified to gauge
> > your true disliking for Tuvan throat-singing until you're trapped next to
> > a "boom-car" blasting it into your ears at 155 decibels.
>
> So get mad at the "boom car", not the music. FWIW, remind me to crank
> whatever I'm playing next time I pull up next to you...
Like what? The Indigo Girls' cover of "My Dingaling?"
Jen Davis
> To borrow from your "noise" example, the sounds of
> traffic aren't music, but if one were to record them
> and use them for the backing track of a rap song,
> they would be.
Suppose I don't back a rap song with them. Suppose I just record the
random sounds of traffic, and loudly declare, "This is my music. I
hereby frame it."
Is it, in fact, "music," as far as you're concerned?
If it is, then your definition of "music" is so overly-broad as to be
practically meaningless--you've declared every single sound music, so
long as a claim is made for it (for that matter, a case could be made
that you've declared *silence* music). If it's not, then how do you
defend your judgement that "it's not?"
Michael Glaser
Sorry to interrupt this cozy fight...And yes, it does appear that you
walked in here with a chip on your shoulder...Not smart.
Anyway, I missed the *objective fact*? Your point of view is appears
subjective, *you don't like rap music*. Hey, I generally don't like rap
either---but there is a lot of *music* I don't like---But my dislike
doesn't mean it isn't music. Just because you or I don't like something
doesn't make it something else. (I don't like scotch therefore it isn't
liquor?)
Music tends to be something that one can appreciate more with
experience. Same with scotch, I'm told. If only because you will be
exposed to different forms of an art, experience increases the chance
*something* will appeal to you in a way it appeals to others.
Thus, it is not like "falling from a 70-story building", where the
experience is common and unchanging. Unless, you have never been able to
appreciate music, food, art after you spent more time experiencing them?
At what point in your life did new experiences fail to change your
opinion?
Are your *tastes* locked-in and unlikely to change regardless what your
future experiences are?
"I don't like it" doesn't mean "It isn't music".
"I don't like it now" doesn't mean "Exposure over time won't change my
*opinion*.
Ya know, some kids actually get beyond the Happy Meal phase and
*learn/experience/grow-up* anchovies on their pizza.
Michael
Please direct e-mail to both of the following addresses :
mitc...@image-link.com
mitc...@att.net
Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.
David Stone
> Alec Horgan (alexande...@yale.edu) writes;
>
>> To borrow from your "noise" example, the sounds of
>> traffic aren't music, but if one were to record them
>> and use them for the backing track of a rap song,
>> they would be.
>
> Suppose I don't back a rap song with them. Suppose I just record the
> random sounds of traffic, and loudly declare, "This is my music. I
> hereby frame it."
>
> Is it, in fact, "music," as far as you're concerned?
>
> If it is, then your definition of "music" is so overly-broad as to be
> practically meaningless--you've declared every single sound music, so
> long as a claim is made for it (for that matter, a case could be made
> that you've declared *silence* music). If it's not, then how do you
> defend your judgement that "it's not?"
In my twenties and early thirties I played in a variety of bands, ranging
from folk to bluegrass to noise to rock to country to jazz. In the noise
band, S & M Rhinos, I usually played (by demolishing) a section of plastic
pipe. We always considered what we did music. So did others. People danced
to it.
As for silence being music, it can be if it's in the right frame. Check out
John Cage's composition "4'33"". (That's "four minutes thirty-three
seconds".)
__________
David Stone
David Stone
> Dutch Courage (hpstr...@aol.commissar) writes;
>
>> I dont like Lima beans[1]. Doesn't make them not food, I figure.
>>
>> I also wonder why people who don't like Lima beans have to volunteer this
>> information with such hyperboyle, and people who don't like, I dunno,
>> hamhocks
>> just go "I don't like hamhocks" when they speak up about it at all.
>
> Perhaps if total strangers were in the habit of walking up to you and
> inserting lima beans in your mouth, without your permission, you'd adopt
> a more militant line with respect to lima beans. Let me know the next
> time you attend a party and are forced to eat lima beans throughout the
> entire evening, and we can revisit your theory that people should just
> accept ugly noise washing over them without comment.
>
>> Dutch "Have you ever went over a friend's house to eat, and the food just
>> ain't
>> no good?" Courage
>
> Jen "Sure I have. I can "not eat" food, though. I can't "not hear"
> horrible thumping noise at 145 decibels." Davis
>
Perhaps you could go to different parties.
__________
David Stone
David Stone
>
> I mean, I have enough experience with respect to falling down to
> understand that falling from a 70-story building would be very, very bad-
> -without *ever* having experienced exactly that sort of fall. Aren't
> there things in your life you have enough experience of to know that you
> don't want to ever have another experience of?
As Mark Twain said, you don't have to eat the whole omlette to know the egg
was bad.
__________
David Stone
Jen Davis
> Sorry to interrupt this cozy fight...And yes, it does appear that you
> walked in here with a chip on your shoulder...Not smart.
Actually, I walked in here only to challenge the notion that there were
racist overtones to a dislike of rap.
> Anyway, I missed the *objective fact*? Your point of view is appears
> subjective, *you don't like rap music*. Hey, I generally don't like rap
> either---but there is a lot of *music* I don't like---But my dislike
> doesn't mean it isn't music. Just because you or I don't like something
> doesn't make it something else. (I don't like scotch therefore it isn't
> liquor?)
When I hear the roar of a jackhammer, I say "it's not music." I don't
care if somebody does think it's music, nor if *everybody* thinks it's
music; as far as I'm concerned, it's not. And if a hot new artist
records a whole CD of roaring jackhammers, it doesn't mean that
automatically there is now music where once there was only noise. It's
still just ugly noise.
I put rap in the same category; it's just awful, annoying noise.
I'll ask you the same question I asked Alec Horgan; name something that
someone says is music, but that you think isn't music, and explain why
you think it's not music. If you can't do that, then you've got a
definition that objectively excludes nothing. If it excludes nothing,
then it's useless.
So, I record 74 minutes of me using a jackhammer, and hand you the CD. I
call it music. Is it?
> Music tends to be something that one can appreciate more with
> experience. Same with scotch, I'm told. If only because you will be
> exposed to different forms of an art, experience increases the chance
> *something* will appeal to you in a way it appeals to others.
Would you perhaps start to enjoy and appreciate the roar of a jackhammer
if you increased your exposure to it? Would it perhaps become "music?"
See, you prefaced your paragraph by assuming a fact I dispute; that rap
is music. You think it's music, you increased your exposure to it, and
found your appreciation heightened. But I think it's noise. And you
don't suddenly start to appreciate noise even if you deafen yourself with
it.
> Ya know, some kids actually get beyond the Happy Meal phase and
> *learn/experience/grow-up* anchovies on their pizza.
Now you're just back to the same old refrain. "If only Jen would
*experience* the glory of rap, she'd stop being such a *baby* and join us
in our hosannas to the Boom Car."
Michael Glaser
>
> Alec Horgan (alexande...@yale.edu) writes;
>
> > To borrow from your "noise" example, the sounds of
> > traffic aren't music, but if one were to record them
> > and use them for the backing track of a rap song,
> > they would be.
>
> Suppose I don't back a rap song with them. Suppose I just record the
> random sounds of traffic, and loudly declare, "This is my music. I
> hereby frame it."
>
> Is it, in fact, "music," as far as you're concerned?
>
> If it is, then your definition of "music" is so overly-broad as to be
> practically meaningless--you've declared every single sound music, so
> long as a claim is made for it (for that matter, a case could be made
> that you've declared *silence* music). If it's not, then how do you
> defend your judgement that "it's not?"
I'll propose narrow legitimate, definition of music. (It would not
include silence...)
[From Websters:]
Music:
1 a the science or art of ordering tones or sounds in succession, in
combination, and in temporal relationships to produce a composition
having unity and continuity
b : vocal, instrumental, or mechanical sounds having rhythm, melody, or
harmony
So, we have a relationship between rhythm, melody or harmony so that it
produces unity and continuity. In fact, if there wasn't this
relationship, you wouldn't be able to recognize these sounds as sounds
of a *rap song*.
Interesting that Jen is able to *recognize* rap as *something*, (as
opposed to those who can't appreciate or identify some forms of art as
*anything*).
Thus the unity and continuity of the form *is* shared through various
examples of the form, so that she is able to not like *any of it*.
However, *not liking* can only be subjective ---as the form qualifies as
a form without her endorsement.
BTW, pumpkin pie is *food* whether you like it, choose to eat it or
define it as food. You will have more authority here if your arguments
don't depend on your *private language*.
Michael Glaser
>
> Michael Glaser (mitc...@image-link.com) writes;
>
> > Sorry to interrupt this cozy fight...And yes, it does appear that you
> > walked in here with a chip on your shoulder...Not smart.
>
> Actually, I walked in here only to challenge the notion that there were
> racist overtones to a dislike of rap.
There was *racial factor*---until bunches of white folks decided they
liked rap and are throwin' most of the money into the industry.
> I'll ask you the same question I asked Alec Horgan; name something that
> someone says is music, but that you think isn't music, and explain why
> you think it's not music. If you can't do that, then you've got a
> definition that objectively excludes nothing. If it excludes nothing,
> then it's useless.
I only *like* a bit of what is for sale in the average music store. I
still wouldn't exclude the rest as being music. Nor would I use my
preferences as a definition of music.
So, if we use the music store as a benchmark (rather than jackhammers?),
is rap the only music in the store you don't like or is it the only
music in the store you don't like *and* don't think is music.
> See, you prefaced your paragraph by assuming a fact I dispute; that rap
> is music. You think it's music, you increased your exposure to it, and
> found your appreciation heightened. But I think it's noise. And you
> don't suddenly start to appreciate noise even if you deafen yourself with
> it.
Oh, because rap is music. You so don't like it you don't even recognize
it as music.
Just because you can't appreciate rap as music or may never appreciate
it does not mean it is not music. One's appreciation of a *type* of
music and their tendancy to judge it *as* music or not should be
mutually exclusive judgements.
> > Ya know, some kids actually get beyond the Happy Meal phase and
> > *learn/experience/grow-up* anchovies on their pizza.
>
> Now you're just back to the same old refrain. "If only Jen would
> *experience* the glory of rap, she'd stop being such a *baby* and join us
> in our hosannas to the Boom Car."
You are free to hate it. I am curious why you can't *just* hate it? Why
must your hate for it also disqualify it as an art form? Why must the
legitimacy of rap as music depend on whether you can tolerate it or not?
Why jump to the extreme and suggest that music you don't like is closer
to a jackhammer than many styles of music which is less appreciated than
rap?
mlo...@civetsystems.com
> Glenn Rice <extg...@showme.missouri.edu> wrote:
>
> > You owe
> >me an apology, though I doubt I will get one from you.
Talk about your self-fulfilling prophesies! There was some loose talk
about racism floating about during the last rap thread, none of it
from Glenn, but Seanette just misremembered the source. I think
you're even now, though.
> You almost didn't, due entirely to that last clause.
[She never does apologize. I wouldn't have either, in the
circumstance...]
M.
mlo...@civetsystems.com
> m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) writes:
>
> > David Barr writes:
> > > I was CFO of the label that put out Naughty By Nature's records ...
> > > we made up promotional T-shirts featuring the phrase "Down With O.P.P.".
> > > ... Apparently, those people [in Canada] thought the T-shirt was an
> > > attack on the Ontario Provincial Police rather than an expression of
> > > approval of the idea of sleeping with someone else's girlfriend (or of
> > > being the participating GF).
> >
> > Not surprising. So, what were the initials intended to stand for?
>
> O is for Other, P is for People's, scratch your temple
> The last P, well, that's not so simple
> It's sorta like, well, another way to call a cat a kitten
Even I got that. My question is, does "down with" in this context
mean "I am philosophically opposed to" (as it usually means on
T-shirts) or "I am accepting of" (which seems like a common rap
expression, "I'm down with that.")?
M.
Alec Horgan
Jen Davis <jne...@fcc.gov> writes:
> If it is, then your definition of "music" is so overly-broad as to be
> practically meaningless--you've declared every single sound music, so
> long as a claim is made for it (for that matter, a case could be made
> that you've declared *silence* music).
You don't need to "make a case"; I've already explicitly
said that silence could be music. You weren't paying
attention. I take it that this is an integral aspect of
your rhetorical style, but it's not one that tends to
foster fruitful discussion.
On that note, I think I'll excuse myself. The new Dead
Prez CD is demanding my attention and promises to be
considerably more rewarding.
Alec
Big Iron5
>Suppose I don't back a rap song with them. Suppose I just record the
>random sounds of traffic, and loudly declare, "This is my music. I
>hereby frame it."
Well, since you haven't taken any steps to "order" these sounds in any way, I'd
say it would be fair to say that's not "music." Of course, rap does consist of
ordered rhythms and musical notes, often including plenty of melody, so the
comparison to jackhammers and traffic noise remains elusive.
RM Mentock
> You are free to hate it. I am curious why you can't *just* hate it? Why
> must your hate for it also disqualify it as an art form? Why must the
> legitimacy of rap as music depend on whether you can tolerate it or not?
> Why jump to the extreme and suggest that music you don't like is closer
> to a jackhammer than many styles of music which is less appreciated than
> rap?
The answer to this question is fairly obvious, so
maybe you asked it 'rhetorically'?*
When people hate something, or even dislike it intensely,
they tend to dismiss it entirely, to justify their dislike.
That is particularly true when they cannot articulate why
they don't dislike it.
Unfortunately, forcing people to take this logical step
usually results in solidifying their position such that
they can never retract. Once the argument hits this level,
you're either wasting your time, or you're going to waste
a *lot* of time before you succeed in changing their mind.
--
RM Mentock
*another rhetorical question
The war on ignorance begins with me
http://sentient.home.mindspring.com/dan/
Dutch Courage
"I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn
human actions, but to understand them" -Spinoza
Jen Davis
> I'll propose narrow legitimate, definition of music. (It would not
> include silence...)
>
> [From Websters:]
> Music:
> 1 a the science or art of ordering tones or sounds in succession, in
> combination, and in temporal relationships to produce a composition
> having unity and continuity
> b : vocal, instrumental, or mechanical sounds having rhythm, melody, or
> harmony
But you're dodging my question. I'll ask it again;
Are there *any* sets of sounds which I label "music" about which you are
allowed to say, and would be justified in saying, "No, Jen, you're wrong;
that's just not music."
Look, there are essentially two definitions you guys are using to support
your argument:
1. "Anything labeled music must be music." (The Alec Horgan "frame"
theory.)
2. "Music is ordered tones, sounds in succession, combination..." (The
"Book" definition.)
I'd argue that the first is worthless because it's overly broad; it
allows me to slap a "music!" label on a recording of a toilet flushing
and forbids you from disputing that it's, in fact, "music." The second
fails because it admits stuff that contains tones, order, temporal yadda-
yadda but which we've all decided are not music; freeway sounds, a diesel
engine idling.
> So, we have a relationship between rhythm, melody or harmony so that it
> produces unity and continuity. In fact, if there wasn't this
> relationship, you wouldn't be able to recognize these sounds as sounds
> of a *rap song*.
But you can find a relationship between the rhythm, melody, and harmony
involved with a huge crane driving piles. Using this relationship, we
can recognize these sounds as sounds of a *pile driver*.
> Thus the unity and continuity of the form *is* shared through various
> examples of the form, so that she is able to not like *any of it*.
> However, *not liking* can only be subjective ---as the form qualifies as
> a form without her endorsement.
Now you're closing in on what I would use as a definition of music, a
definition which would include (but perhaps not be limited to), "A deeply
personal, profoundly *subjective* instance of a form of communication
established between the artist and the listener, that *succeeds* in
imparting some sort of understanding from the artist *to* the listener."
On this level, rap fails dismally when I'm the intended listener. No
communication takes place, regardless of how loud the volume goes.
You may disagree, and that's OK. But I would submit that my definition
avoids painting me into a corner where I'm forced to accept any sound as
music if someone calls it that, and avoids being forced to accept natural
noises that might be orderly, and harmonic, and melodic without being a
directed communication at all.
> BTW, pumpkin pie is *food* whether you like it, choose to eat it or
> define it as food.
Cows can eat grass. To them, grass is "food." I can't eat grass. To
me, grass is "not food." I can't eat chocolate, either (I'm allergic).
To you, it might be "food." To me, it's "not food." If you ask me,
"food" is a highly subjective term that depends absolutely on what the
hungry person can or cannot eat. (Wouldn't you agree that it would be
completely stupid of me to define "food" in a way that included a
substance which, if eaten, would probably kill me?)
> You will have more authority here if your arguments
> don't depend on your *private language*.
I'm not looking for "authority." Simple "understanding" will be
perfectly fine.
Jen Davis
> > Now you're just back to the same old refrain. "If only Jen would
> > *experience* the glory of rap, she'd stop being such a *baby* and join us
> > in our hosannas to the Boom Car."
>
> You are free to hate it. I am curious why you can't *just* hate it? Why
> must your hate for it also disqualify it as an art form? Why must the
> legitimacy of rap as music depend on whether you can tolerate it or not?
> Why jump to the extreme and suggest that music you don't like is closer
> to a jackhammer than many styles of music which is less appreciated than
> rap?
Because I honestly believe that music is more than just someone sticking
a music label on something, or some "series of tones" that we could teach
a computer to discern from noise.
And let me ask a counter-question. I'm curious why you can't tolerate me
holding the opinion that rap is not music. Why must the legitimacy of my
own definition of what qualifies as music depend upon it conforming to
your understanding of what music is?
RM Mentock
> Now you're closing in on what I would use as a definition of music, a
> definition which would include (but perhaps not be limited to), "A deeply
> personal, profoundly *subjective* instance of a form of communication
> established between the artist and the listener, that *succeeds* in
> imparting some sort of understanding from the artist *to* the listener."
> On this level, rap fails dismally when I'm the intended listener. No
> communication takes place, regardless of how loud the volume goes.
Yahbut, then, Sinatra ain't music either, right?
--
RM Mentock
Briar Rose
>So, I record 74 minutes of me using a jackhammer, and hand you the CD. I
>call it music. Is it?
Depends. Do you record the jackhammer paying attention
to the phrasing and structure of the sound? Do you try
it out on different surfaces for different sounds, and then
put them all together in a structured, deliberate way?
I have a CD here that is basically 200 minutes of FM Einheit
banging on concrete with rebar. I think it's music, but I
wouldn't say that for all banging-on-concrete-with-rebar,
because some of it is done without any point or intention,
and without any eye toward artistic expression.
:) Connie-Lynne
--
As a longtime computer nerd, he knew that, for him, perfecting
programs was what watching television was for others -- a mindless
activity that promised pleasure, lasted for hours, and left him
feeling like an old cigarette butt. --Jane Smiley, _Moo_
McCaffertA
<jne...@fcc.gov> writes:
>And let me ask a counter-question. I'm curious why you can't tolerate me
>holding the opinion that rap is not music.
Because, except in juvenile solipsism, the definitions of common words
cannot be changed by personal fiat?
Jen Davis
> >And let me ask a counter-question. I'm curious why you can't tolerate me
> >holding the opinion that rap is not music.
>
> Because, except in juvenile solipsism, the definitions of common words
> cannot be changed by personal fiat?
Do you feel bound by the definitions of "common words" in all cases? Or
have you ever found yourself questioning those definitions?
Jen Davis
> >So, I record 74 minutes of me using a jackhammer, and hand you the CD. I
> >call it music. Is it?
>
> Depends. Do you record the jackhammer paying attention
> to the phrasing and structure of the sound? Do you try
> it out on different surfaces for different sounds, and then
> put them all together in a structured, deliberate way?
No. Not at all. I just recorded them at random.
RM Mentock
>
> Briar Rose (cly...@ugcs.caltech.edu) writes;
>
> > >So, I record 74 minutes of me using a jackhammer, and hand you the CD. I
> > >call it music. Is it?
> >
> > Depends. Do you record the jackhammer paying attention
> > to the phrasing and structure of the sound? Do you try
> > it out on different surfaces for different sounds, and then
> > put them all together in a structured, deliberate way?
>
> No. Not at all. I just recorded them at random.
Cool. Who's your publisher, and where can I get em?
Michael Glaser
>
> Dutch Courage (hpstr...@aol.commissar) wrote:
>
> : I still wonder why rap invites such ire, and, I dunno, polka doesn't.
>
> Polka isn't widespread enough for people to bother.
>
> Jas.
>
> -------------------------
> James Andrews
> Philadelphia, PA
> Remove the XX
Come to South Bend any Friday, Saturday or attend a wedding here.
RM Mentock
> And let me ask a counter-question. I'm curious why you can't tolerate me
> holding the opinion that rap is not music. Why must the legitimacy of my
> own definition of what qualifies as music depend upon it conforming to
> your understanding of what music is?
Now, there's the ultimate afca newbie question
<jej>This is afca</jej>
Ya shoulda lurked more, they've been trying to tell ya
Big Iron5
>Look, there are essentially two definitions you guys are using to support
>your argument:
>
>1. "Anything labeled music must be music." (The Alec Horgan "frame"
>theory.)
>
>2. "Music is ordered tones, sounds in succession, combination..." (The
>"Book" definition.)
>
>I'd argue that the first is worthless because it's overly broad; it
>allows me to slap a "music!" label on a recording of a toilet flushing
>and forbids you from disputing that it's, in fact, "music." The second
>fails because it admits stuff that contains tones, order, temporal yadda-
>yadda but which we've all decided are not music; freeway sounds, a diesel
>engine idling.
The second does not fail, of course, since most people understand that there
has been no intentional ordering of such sounds with the purpose of creating a
composition.
Alec Horgan
> Jen Davis <jne...@fcc.gov> wrote:
> >So, I record 74 minutes of me using a jackhammer, and hand you the CD. I
> >call it music. Is it?
>
> Depends. Do you record the jackhammer paying attention
> to the phrasing and structure of the sound? Do you try
> it out on different surfaces for different sounds, and then
> put them all together in a structured, deliberate way?
>
> I have a CD here that is basically 200 minutes of FM Einheit
> banging on concrete with rebar. I think it's music, but I
> wouldn't say that for all banging-on-concrete-with-rebar,
> because some of it is done without any point or intention,
> and without any eye toward artistic expression.
But one can bang on concrete in a nonstructured,
undeliberate way, with little or no attention to pitch
or rhythm or phrasing or any of the other traditional
elements of music, and still have a "point or
intention" and an "eye toward artistic expression."
In particular, the point or intention could be to
question or undermine the very concepts of structure
and order, to produce a sound that is, in some sense,
more "natural."
Note that this is precisely the sort of thing to which
John Cage devoted much of his career, and he's widely
regarded as one of the most significant and
influential American composers of the 20th century.
Alec
Arthur Wohlwill
>From: ran...@visionplace.com (Randy Poe)
>Subject: Re: Bridging the generation gap
>Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 04:59:52 GMT
>On 28 Feb 2000 18:26:14 -0500, Alec Horgan <alexande...@yale.edu>
>wrote:
>>Note that this is precisely the sort of thing to which
>>John Cage devoted much of his career, and he's widely
>>regarded as one of the most significant and
>>influential American composers of the 20th century.
>Which is why so much of 20th century music is rightly regarded as a
>joke.
>They can call that guy who wraps buildings in plastic an "artist", but
>that doesn't make it art, no matter how many critics fall over
>themselves declaring to to be.
According to the recently deceased Jean Shepherd, there is or was a Museum of
Shlock Art. Included in the collection was a cat clock whose tail went back
and forth with the motion of the clock, and a juice mixer thing that looked
like a hand grenade. So, rather than debate whether or not something is "art"
or "music" it is better to acknowledge that something can be art and still
suck.
Arthur Wohlwill adwo...@UIC.EDU
Jake Schmidt
news:MPG.132449db4...@news.giganews.com...
<snip>
> > So get mad at the "boom car", not the music. FWIW, remind me to crank
> > whatever I'm playing next time I pull up next to you...
>
> Like what? The Indigo Girls' cover of "My Dingaling?"
I'd prefer not--I don't particularly enjoy that music...
> --
> Jennifer C. Davis
> <if I needed email, you'd have my address already>
> #
> "Come to think of it, there are already a million
> monkeys on a million typewriters, and Usenet is
> NOTHING like Shakespeare."
> -- Blair Houghton
--
Jake Schmidt
Remove a "d" to reply...
Jeff Janes
: Even I got that. My question is, does "down with" in this context
: mean "I am philosophically opposed to" (as it usually means on
: T-shirts) or "I am accepting of" (which seems like a common rap
: expression, "I'm down with that.")?
I thought it was more of a "lie down with" or "go down on".
Jeff
FW Lev
>Dutch Courage (hpstr...@aol.commissar) writes;
>
>> Dutch "Have you ever went over a friend's house to eat, and the food just
ain't
>> no good?" Courage
>
>Jen "Sure I have. I can "not eat" food, though. I can't "not hear"
>horrible thumping noise at 145 decibels." Davis
*bzzzzzt* Sorry, that's incorrect. Of course, considering your stance
in this thread, we didn't really expect you to get it.
-Lev
Randy Poe
wrote:
>Note that this is precisely the sort of thing to which
>John Cage devoted much of his career, and he's widely
>regarded as one of the most significant and
>influential American composers of the 20th century.
Which is why so much of 20th century music is rightly regarded as a
joke.
They can call that guy who wraps buildings in plastic an "artist", but
that doesn't make it art, no matter how many critics fall over
themselves declaring to to be.
- Randy
Randy Poe
wrote:
>As for silence being music, it can be if it's in the right frame. Check out
>John Cage's composition "4'33"". (That's "four minutes thirty-three
>seconds".)
The premise of which is, I believe, that the random rustlings and
coughings of the audience during that period constitute music.
I agree that if it's hard to defend Cage as music and attack rap as
non-music in the same breath with a straight face.
Which is why I'd make no attempt to defend Cage as music.
- Randy
Alec Horgan
> On 28 Feb 2000 18:26:14 -0500, Alec Horgan <alexande...@yale.edu>
> wrote:
> >Note that this is precisely the sort of thing to which
> >John Cage devoted much of his career, and he's widely
> >regarded as one of the most significant and
> >influential American composers of the 20th century.
> Which is why so much of 20th century music is rightly regarded as a
> joke.
And yet, more often than not, Cage was the only one
laughing. Curious, that.
Alec
Big Iron5
>>Note that this is precisely the sort of thing to which
>>John Cage devoted much of his career, and he's widely
>>regarded as one of the most significant and
>>influential American composers of the 20th century.
>
>Which is why so much of 20th century music is rightly regarded as a
>joke.
I'm not aware that 20th century music is so regarded, rightly or otherwise.
I certainly think that those who regard 4'33" as something other than actual
"music" have a very reasonable position (albeit one with which reasonable
people may differ). But I also certainly think it's "art."
>They can call that guy who wraps buildings in plastic an "artist", but
>that doesn't make it art, no matter how many critics fall over
>themselves declaring to to be.
If you are refering to Christo, I don't think there is any question that what
he does is "art," and often very interesting art at that.
Big Iron5
>>As for silence being music, it can be if it's in the right frame. Check out
>>John Cage's composition "4'33"". (That's "four minutes thirty-three
>>seconds".)
>
>The premise of which is, I believe, that the random rustlings and
>coughings of the audience during that period constitute music.
Personally, I think of that more as a form of "performance art," but I have
little problem with people characterizing it as "music."
>I agree that if it's hard to defend Cage as music and attack rap as
>non-music in the same breath with a straight face.
>
>Which is why I'd make no attempt to defend Cage as music.
Say what you will about 4'33", but Cage has done a heck of a lot more than
that, and it's (for the most part, at least) indisputably "music."
Jerry Bauer
Randy Poe <ran...@visionplace.com> wrote:
>On 28 Feb 2000 18:26:14 -0500, Alec Horgan <alexande...@yale.edu>
>wrote:
>>John Cage devoted much of his career, and he's widely
>>regarded as one of the most significant and
>>influential American composers of the 20th century.
>
>Which is why so much of 20th century music is rightly regarded as a
>joke.
As opposed to music of earlier centuries that did not survive because
nobody liked it. 98% of everything is crap, so I hear.
>
>They can call that guy who wraps buildings in plastic an "artist", but
>that doesn't make it art, no matter how many critics fall over
>themselves declaring to to be.
Art requires a producer and a consumer, who may be the same person.
Art is art if either the producer or consumer says it is.
That people have different taste in art is a good thing. Were this
not so, we would rapidly converge on the common taste. If there were
not things that you could dislike, could you like anything at all?
In this regard, the expression of distaste for a certain form of
acoustic art tends to validate it as art. To say that rap is not
music pretty much asserts that it is.
Of course, it then follows that if you disagree with me, I must be
right. Don't you agree?
Jerry "de gustibus non carborundum" Bauer
Dutch Courage
>Michael Glaser (mitc...@image-link.com) writes;
>
>> I'll propose narrow legitimate, definition of music. (It would not
>> include silence...)
>>
>> [From Websters:]
>> Music:
>> 1 a the science or art of ordering tones or sounds in succession, in
>> combination, and in temporal relationships to produce a composition
>> having unity and continuity
>> b : vocal, instrumental, or mechanical sounds having rhythm, melody, or
>> harmony
>
>But you're dodging my question. I'll ask it again;
>
>Are there *any* sets of sounds which I label "music" about which you are
>allowed to say, and would be justified in saying, "No, Jen, you're wrong;
>that's just not music."
Ummm...hmmm. Well, we might quibble over something like "Revolution #9," and
perhaps some of Phil Glass or the Frank Zappa projects (Captain Beefheart,
etc.) are more performance art, but pretty much anything created by humans to
be music is music, sure. Anyway, Rap really doesn't stary too far from
traditional forms, so it's not something we can really debate the musicality of
as far as it applies to the definition given above.
>
>Look, there are essentially two definitions you guys are using to support
>your argument:
It seems to me you're using two definitions. You seem to be equivocating
music as " 2 a : an agreeable sound : EUPHONY <her voice was ~ to my ears>"
with the more useful, technical definition.
>1. "Anything labeled music must be music." (The Alec Horgan "frame"
>theory.)
Well, perhaps, and anything labeled art is art, even if its not necessarily
good art, or whatever. But again, I think the same sort of clumsy equivocation
applies.
>2. "Music is ordered tones, sounds in succession, combination..." (The
>"Book" definition.)
Said book being, of course, the dictionary, and it's a good idea to use well
agreed upon, recognized definitions for the words we use to communicate with
others, wouldn't you hampster couch it step dad, helicopter?
>
>I'd argue that the first is worthless
I'd rather you not.
> because it's overly broad;
So's your momma, you don't see me saying she ain't your momma, do I?
> it
>allows me to slap a "music!" label on a recording of a toilet flushing
>and forbids you from disputing that it's, in fact, "music."
Yes, but rap has singing and drums and instruments and you can dance to it.
> The second
>fails because it admits stuff that contains tones, order, temporal yadda-
>yadda but which we've all decided are not music; freeway sounds, a diesel
>engine idling.
No, those really don't have the yadda yadda.
>
>> So, we have a relationship between rhythm, melody or harmony so that it
>> produces unity and continuity. In fact, if there wasn't this
>> relationship, you wouldn't be able to recognize these sounds as sounds
>> of a *rap song*.
>
>But you can find a relationship between the rhythm, melody, and harmony
>involved with a huge crane driving piles. Using this relationship, we
>can recognize these sounds as sounds of a *pile driver*.
I suppose it would be possible to make a compositional entity out of the
sounds of heavy equipment, if you arranged them in some recognizably musical
form. In fact, there's a style of music called "industrial" that does just
that. If, say, Phill Glass want to write a cymphony for the working man, he
could arrange various factory sounds with rhthym, perhaps melody. presumably
the tones would vary enough so as to produce harmony, etc.
>
>> Thus the unity and continuity of the form *is* shared through various
>> examples of the form, so that she is able to not like *any of it*.
>> However, *not liking* can only be subjective ---as the form qualifies as
>> a form without her endorsement.
>
>Now you're closing in on what I would use as a definition of music, a
>definition which would include (but perhaps not be limited to), "A deeply
>personal, profoundly *subjective* instance of a form of communication
>established between the artist and the listener, that *succeeds* in
>imparting some sort of understanding from the artist *to* the listener."
This strikes me as overly broad. Now its "anything I like" instead of "any
ordered progression of tones presented in a more or less musical context."
Again, it also strikes me that the average Rap song isn't nearly as avant
garde as all that.
>> BTW, pumpkin pie is *food* whether you like it, choose to eat it or
>> define it as food.
>
>Cows can eat grass.
The cow ate all the grass, and went home.