179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Kent williams
To:
i'd do mary
Date:
Tue, 17 Jul 2001 08:55:54 -0500 (CDT)
Subject:
Re: [idm]Laptop Punks and Powerbook Pop
Msg-Id:
<Pine.HPP.3.96.1010717083025.10596A-100000@arthur.avalon.net>
In-Reply-To:
<B7796699.8FC%pachinko74@mac.com>
Mbox:
idm.0107.gz
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Peter Schrock wrote:
quoted 2 lines And besides, I would hardly consider Matmos and Kit Clayton as> And besides, I would hardly consider Matmos and Kit Clayton as > being of the same category as Kid606 and Cex.
Matmos, Kit Clayton, Kid606 and Cex are all completely different people, working with different artistic goals in mind. The fact that they use similar tools to achieve their goals is irrelevant. Picasso and Grant Wood both used oil paints. On the other hand, all those guys on some level have similar goals, are friends, and constantly influence each other. So while dropping them in the same pidgeonhole is not ultimately accurate, it recognizes a basic affinity they share. Words label things with a remarkable range of precision and imprecision. Human beings only synthesize meaning from their sensory input by virtue of their ability to categorize non-equivalent objects as similar. Suppose you lost the ability to look at two trees and say they're both trees, because they obviously differ? What would a person be like who saw every percieved every thing as unique and unconnected to any other thing? The fact that each thing (and person) is unique doesn't mean they don't fit into categories. Where a category is apt, it's useful in building a meaning -- reductionism is inevitable and necessary. The fact that journalists often don't get it doesn't mean there's no use for category and genre labels. Simon Reynolds manages to annoy people because he simultaneously personalizes his perceptions and at the same rhetorically promotes them to the level of fact. Because he's human he's sometimes wrong. But he always says precisely something, which is more than most writers about popular electronic music. Since he's articulate and spends time striving for lucid descriptions, he's valuable even when you disagree with him. As an intelligent listener it's your job to see and derive pleasure from the unique qualities of each piece of music. It's also your job to critically evaluate everything you read. While everyone is entitled to the occasional bitch about the sad state of music journalism, it's a pretty pale phenomenon upon which to obsess. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org