IDM Mailing Archive

1998-10-06 18:59Steve81778@aol.comer, the way i reckon it, anything good is good, not good because of the thought that went

From:: <Steve81778@aol.com>
To:: <s0ewoliv@titan.vcu.edu>, <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 14:59:25 EDT
Subject:: Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_

er, the way i reckon it, anything good is good, not good because of the thought that went behind it. when i hear a piece of music, see a film or go to a gallery i don't demand to see the artists medical records and a thesis paper on his thoughts behind the work. -steve In a message dated 98-10-06 14:08:08 EDT, s0ewoliv@titan.vcu.edu writes: << Sad loss? The man is insane, and anything he does is completely by accident and cannot really be considered "good." 'crazy people are so fucking boring... ' >>

1998-10-06 19:25wellsAt 02:59 PM 10/6/98 EDT, Steve81778@aol.com wrote: >er, the way i reckon it, anything good

From:: wells <s0ewoliv@titan.vcu.edu>
To:: <Steve81778@aol.com>, <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Tue, 06 Oct 1998 15:25:48 -0400
Subject:: Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_
Reply to:: Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_

At 02:59 PM 10/6/98 EDT, Steve81778@aol.com wrote:

quoted 2 lines er, the way i reckon it, anything good is good, not good because of the

>er, the way i reckon it, anything good is good, not good because of the >thought that went behind it. when i hear a piece of music, see a film or

go to

quoted 1 line a gallery i don't demand to see the artists medical records and a thesis

>a gallery i don't demand to see the artists medical records and a thesis

paper

quoted 4 lines on his thoughts behind the work.

>on his thoughts behind the work. > >-steve >

yeah, that is true. but what you seem to be doing is taking the work itself (song, film, etC) as what is good, and not the artist behind it. for example, if i wrote a book, and you took it completely out of context and really enjoyed _your_ interpretation of it, then you would be viewing the work as good, and me (as the author) as irrelevant to the work. that's what i mean when I say Syd Barrett sucks. maybe a song or two he has done is good, but his authorship seems irrelevant (since there was really no intention behind it as he's completely fucking bugger). am i making sense? probably not. it's a matter of opinion, i guess. ah well ;) :: wells oliver / s0ewoliv@titan.vcu.edu / http://mute.simplenet.com :: 'try to smile as they devour our youth'

1998-10-07 13:37Michael J MakunasOn Tue, 6 Oct 1998, wells wrote: > but what you seem to be doing is taking the work itself

From:: Michael J Makunas <mmakunas@eecs.tufts.edu>
To:: wells <s0ewoliv@titan.vcu.edu>
Cc:: <Steve81778@aol.com>, <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 09:37:27 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:: Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_
Reply to:: Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_

On Tue, 6 Oct 1998, wells wrote:

quoted 11 lines but what you seem to be doing is taking the work itself (song, film, etC)

> but what you seem to be doing is taking the work itself (song, film, etC) > as what is good, and not the artist behind it. for example, if i wrote a > book, and you took it completely out of context and really enjoyed _your_ > interpretation of it, then you would be viewing the work as good, and me > (as the author) as irrelevant to the work. > > that's what i mean when I say Syd Barrett sucks. maybe a song or two he has > done is good, but his authorship seems irrelevant (since there was really > no intention behind it as he's completely fucking bugger). > > am i making sense? probably not. it's a matter of opinion, i guess.

You're making sense but you've got a few facts wrong. First he wasn't always insane, he just snapped one day (according to a recent interview with Rick Wright). So a lot of his stuff was written when he was fully functional. Second, being insane does not mean you are completely devoid of all conscious thought. Crazy people think, too. There's just a low signal to noise ratio. -Michael

1998-10-07 16:20Dizzy J.> but what you seem to be doing is taking the work itself (song, film, etc) > as what is g

From:: Dizzy J. <dizzyj@fc.net>
To:: <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:20:05 -0500 (CDT)
Subject:: music and context (Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_
Reply to:: Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_

quoted 5 lines but what you seem to be doing is taking the work itself (song, film, etc)

> but what you seem to be doing is taking the work itself (song, film, etc) > as what is good, and not the artist behind it. for example, if i wrote a > book, and you took it completely out of context and really enjoyed _your_ > interpretation of it, then you would be viewing the work as good, and me > (as the author) as irrelevant to the work.

when a piece is created (music, art, etc..) it takes on a life of its own. When that piece is consumed by others besides the creator, then it no longer lives in the single context of the creator, but in all the context of the people who have shared it. The meanings of a piece do not need to be the same to all people, nor do they need to be in the same context as the creator. I think one of the most flattering things for a musician is when someone mentions how a piece affected them, but in a completely way then the artist had originally meant it. At that moment, they should realize that the music is no longer solely "owned" (not talking copywrites). This does not render the artist irrelevant by any means, but I can certainly enjoy a song without liking the artist, and I can like a particular artist, but not enjoy a certain song. -dj

1998-10-06 20:23Zenon M. Feszczak>er, the way i reckon it, anything good is good, not good because of the >thought that wen

From:: Zenon M. Feszczak <feszczak@sas.upenn.edu>
To:: <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 16:23:17 -0400
Subject:: Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_
Reply to:: Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_

quoted 5 lines er, the way i reckon it, anything good is good, not good because of the

>er, the way i reckon it, anything good is good, not good because of the >thought that went behind it. when i hear a piece of music, see a film or go to >a gallery i don't demand to see the artists medical records and a thesis paper >on his thoughts behind the work. >

Well, then, if a million monkeys bashed on a billion keyboards... 3

1998-10-07 16:07Dizzy J.> Well, then, if a million monkeys bashed on a billion keyboards... then you get 99% of th

From:: Dizzy J. <dizzyj@fc.net>
To:: Zenon M. Feszczak <feszczak@sas.upenn.edu>
Cc:: <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:07:57 -0500 (CDT)
Subject:: Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_
Reply to:: Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_

quoted 1 line Well, then, if a million monkeys bashed on a billion keyboards...

> Well, then, if a million monkeys bashed on a billion keyboards...

then you get 99% of the music that is made...in all genres -dj

1998-10-07 16:12Zenon M. Feszczak>> Well, then, if a million monkeys bashed on a billion keyboards... > >then you get 99% o

From:: Zenon M. Feszczak <feszczak@sas.upenn.edu>
To:: <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 12:12:10 -0400
Subject:: Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_
Reply to:: Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_

quoted 3 lines Well, then, if a million monkeys bashed on a billion keyboards...

>> Well, then, if a million monkeys bashed on a billion keyboards... > >then you get 99% of the music that is made...in all genres

That explains it then. The 1% remainder comprises the remainder, music of artistic merit. A product of pure random chances. Art is, in fact, a statistical anomaly. 3

music and context (Re: (idm) syd barretts got a hole n is head_