IDM Mailing Archive

anyone read <more brilliant than the sun-adventures in sonic fiction> by kodwo eshun? beeeeeeautiful. two pages of this tome could replace all the hours i've wasted wading through all the self-serving pseudo intellectual masturbation that prevails on this list. eshun's use of forced, rhythmic language, his creation of new words, his ENTHUSIASM, is a perfect antidote to the great yawn that has swallowed music writing as of late. many <wire> writers and others seem stuck in this late 80s early90s chic cynicism, this ego stroking blasting of a record, this debasement of someone else's art. sort of like that endless dsp discussion of a few days back(why not bitch about the use of the wah pedal, or the multitrack studio? I think that electric guitar thing is just an annoying fad. you?), just the sheer pleasure that one gets from eloquently declaring a turd a turd. so immature. i would think that we're in a new age of music, and subsequently one of music writing...the two are inseparable. writing devoid of cheesy sentiment and full of newackpoetic word photos. juxtapositions of word against sound, of concept against ether, of music against science fiction, as eshun so beautifully shows us. endless complaints of ae's lack of innovation show the writer's lack of education and emotional depth. to paraphrase eshun:<intelligent dance music, smart techno, once it is called as such, alienates the body and locks you inside your head. you can't get out.> maybe we should all uplift with eloquence the worthy, and simply ignore the banal. it's so easy to be cynical. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

Often I get the impression that people need to be able to rationalise and justify their taste in music. I'm not specifically speaking about the idm list here, but in general. I once read of an experiment performed to deduce conscious versus unconscious control in a human being. A man who was drinking a perfectly nice cup of tea is hypnotised and told to go to the sink and empty the contents of his cup down the sink. This man is a guest in the house and has just expressed his appreciation of the cup of tea. The hypnotist clicks his finger or whatever, and the subject carries out the implanted suggestion. When asked why the tea was rejected, the subject starts to create all kinds of rationalisations and justifications for the act. Contradicting previously held opinions and reaching a rational explanation that keeps his logical world view intact. I get the felling that a lot of us here have poured our cups of tea out. We spend a lot of time nitpicking and trainspotting which are all valid uses of our time but they are by nature ancilliary interests. An opinion on music is something that is going to develop from listening to music, but underneath this there is a raw appreciation of music that transends opinions, historic figures and record levels. You either like a piece or you don't. Music theory is to help you reproduce and categorise a piece, not to help you enjoy it. Hmm you say.. "But you are not enjoying it on as many levels as I am...." Now, some people *enjoy* these entangled debates, others don't. We can all ignore each other and respect this fundamental divide. I know of several people who have stopped reading this list because of an inability to ignore this difference of beahviour. Ah well.... apologies for my inability to make a coherent point.... -- hjw

quoted 6 lines to paraphrase eshun:<intelligent dance

> > to paraphrase eshun:<intelligent dance > > music, smart techno, once it is called as such, alienates the body and >locks > > you inside your head. you can't get out.> > >This guy takes dance music too seriously IMO.

Ok, I agree with you for the most part. I also hate people who use pseudoo intellectual talk, and for the most part real intellectual talk. Because for the most part they are not using it to help clarify or increase understanding, it has become more of an intellectual snobbery than anything. They are just using a slang language to separate themselves from the masses, and in many cases boost their stepped on egos. It's like wearing a sign saying hey look at me I'm smart and your not! When the truth is anyone could learn their slang if they hang around long enough, just like you pick up other sub-cultures slang if you hang around them long enough. What I don't understand is why any truly intellectual person would want to go around talking with their brain up their ass, because if they were a true intellect they would be able to convey their knowledge clearly and effectively to a crowd of any IQ. But what disturbs me is the part of your message I left above. I don't see how anyone can take music too seriously, or any passion for that matter. Where would we be if we told Dali, Michaelangelo, or R Crumb that they took painting to Seriously. What would music be like if we told Mozart, Miles Davis, or Biafra that they took music to seriously. And what if Einstien, Newton or Steeve Case got a notion in there head that they were taking science to seriously, or even what would the state of philosophy be if we told Buddha that he took meditation to seriously. Anyway my point is great things are born from great passions. Roach peace ps. on a side note DJ shadow is another one of those that talks to much of that intellectual mumbo jumbo. _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com

quoted 2 lines It's like wearing a sign

> It's like wearing a sign >saying hey look at me I'm smart and your not!

Theres really no need to get crazy and say that people would wear a sign like this!!!! Im sure there are T-shirts with this already printed on them SHEESH! ernie Ernesto Ikerd, (817) 763-4795 Company Graphics, Dept 17, MZ-1156 Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems Fort Worth, Texas

sorry, this isn't very idm-related but once again i have to stand up for evil, evil intellectualism.

quoted 5 lines What I don't

> What I don't > understand is why any truly intellectual person would want to go around > talking with their brain up their ass, because if they were a true intellect > they would be able to convey their knowledge clearly and effectively to a > crowd of any IQ.

this is the kind of argument an ignorant person would make to justify their ignorance. don't be fooled. certain facts take time, work, & a certain knowledge of facts, useful terms, conventions, etc. in order to assimilate them. i don't know anyone, of any iq, who could wholly explain quantum mechanics without having to explain certain related things first (relativity, some elements of astrophysics, etc.). you could try a metaphor, but as useful as that can be in many cases, in the end it'll be just that, a metaphor, not a real verifiable proposition. the conventions which make up intellectual talk (such as the dreaded 'long words' & other obscure terms) can be, & are, in the worst cases, misused to give a false pretense of intelligence. in this i agree with you. also, some intellectuals (scientists especially) are notorious bad writers -- which i suppose is why they're scientists, not writers -- & can sometime mingle the simplest sentence into something barely recognizable. i will concede that too. but to dismiss intellectual language completely is nothing but an ignorant's tool -- all you're doing is concentrating on the bad aspects while forgetting that all cannot be understood clearly within a basic vocabulary of 10,000 words. that just can't happen. besides, you said yourself that anyone with some work can comprehend these things -- it's not so much a matter of intelligence but of _knowledge_. & once you gain knowledge, you even get the added bonus to be able to detect what's bullshit & what's not in intellectual litterature. also, a healthy, correct use of 'long words' can only render a text clearer, instead of having it lose itself through murky structures of 'simple words' meant to explain complex concepts & phenomenae which they weren't intended to describe in the first place. so why dismiss it at once?

quoted 9 lines But what disturbs me is the part of your message I left above. I don't

> But what disturbs me is the part of your message I left above. I don't > see how anyone can take music too seriously, or any passion for that matter. > Where would we be if we told Dali, Michaelangelo, or R Crumb that they took > painting to Seriously. What would music be like if we told Mozart, Miles > Davis, or Biafra that they took music to seriously. And what if Einstien, > Newton or Steeve Case got a notion in there head that they were taking > science to seriously, or even what would the state of philosophy be if we > told Buddha that he took meditation to seriously. Anyway my point is great > things are born from great passions.

musicians can, & should be serious about their music, as you pointed out. but a critic's work is to place art into a context, not to act as if they created it themselves. the best pieces of musical criticism assume their subjectivity & try to present the reader a way of seeing a specific work of art, _knowing_ that it's just that, one way of seeing it, not the end of all opinion on the matter. sure, they can be passionate all they want about their work, but their work is criticism, not music. a critic who takes something too seriously usually won't be able to explain why the thing they're criticizing is the most wonderful gem (or worst piece of trash) they have ever encountered. all they'll ever say can be summed down to: 'i like/hate it'. & that is it. & sure, have an opinion, but if your entire criticism is nothing but an attempt at an argument in favor of your particular opinion, then your writing isn't worth anything more than me saying: 'the backstreet boys suck' to an army of prepubescent girls.

quoted 2 lines ps. on a side note DJ shadow is another one of those that talks to much of

> ps. on a side note DJ shadow is another one of those that talks to much of > that intellectual mumbo jumbo.

you must mean dj spooky. -- david

quoted 6 lines ps. on a side note DJ shadow is another one of those that talks to much

> > ps. on a side note DJ shadow is another one of those that talks to much >of > > that intellectual mumbo jumbo. > >DJ Shadow, or DJ Spooky? I've never known Shadow to talk much at all, while >I've never known Spooky to shut up :)

I mean Spooky. Sorry, I have a problem with saying Shadow when I mean Spooky and vice versa. Raoch _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com

quoted 6 lines ps. on a side note DJ shadow is another one of those that talks to much

> > ps. on a side note DJ shadow is another one of those that talks to much >of > > that intellectual mumbo jumbo. > >DJ Shadow, or DJ Spooky? I've never known Shadow to talk much at all, while >I've never known Spooky to shut up :)

I mean Spooky. Sorry, I have a problem with saying Shadow when I mean Spooky and vice versa. Roach _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com

quoted 3 lines the conventions which make up intellectual talk (such as the dreaded

>the conventions which make up intellectual talk (such as the dreaded >'long words' & other obscure terms) can be, & are, in the worst cases, >misused to give a false pretense of intelligence.

indubitibly. -jeff -------------- 1642 try 621 --------------

I meant Eshun tries too hard to intellectualize dance music IMO. Maybe I need to do some Es in order to appreciate it as much as him. I find it amusing to intellectualize about these people whose main concerns tend to be "getting pissed" or " 'avin' a good time". Andrei

quoted 16 lines to paraphrase eshun:<intelligent dance

> > > to paraphrase eshun:<intelligent dance > > > music, smart techno, once it is called as such, alienates the body and > >locks > > > you inside your head. you can't get out.> > > > >This guy takes dance music too seriously IMO. > > But what disturbs me is the part of your message I left above. I don't > see how anyone can take music too seriously, or any passion for that matter. > Where would we be if we told Dali, Michaelangelo, or R Crumb that they took > painting to Seriously. What would music be like if we told Mozart, Miles > Davis, or Biafra that they took music to seriously. And what if Einstien, > Newton or Steeve Case got a notion in there head that they were taking > science to seriously, or even what would the state of philosophy be if we > told Buddha that he took meditation to seriously. Anyway my point is great > things are born from great passions.