I think anyone who works to make music is a musician, just like anyone who acts, on stage or off, is an actor. Certainly we should recognize different levels of expertise or experience or focus or quality or whatever, all the while keeping in mind what the intentions of the creator are (do they have an inflated sense of self-worth, or are they a humble prankster artist like "Wierd Al"?)
I agree with the sentiments expressed recently on the list that there should be some recognition of the years of training and experience/expertise that some people have, but I think that goes without saying; I don't see that we need a new word for it when every other field I can think of has no separation, semantically, between the trained and the untrained.
Well, the medical profession has degrees and memberships, etc., but that's different. As far as artistic fields like music, sculpture, theatre, painting, lighting designer - the true recognition of the quality of the artist seems to simply be the recogntion and measurement of one's peers, which can change over time.
quoted 17 lines -----Original Message-----
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Josh Bown [mailto:josh@undertone.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 2:25 PM
> To: Philip Sherburne
> Cc: 'idm@hyperreal.org'
> Subject: [idm] Re: definitions
>
>
> I would say John Cage had a background as a musician but that when he
> was going all wacky he was really being a "sonic experimentalist" or
> something.... He was inspired by his own musicianship perhaps...
>
> or maybe I am just a crotchety stubborn conservative
> traditionalist who
> needs to wake up, smell the revolution and have a cup of purple
> kool-aid.
>
---------------------------------------------------
Get free personalized email at
http://www.iname.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org