Re: MD Nihilism (Punk)

From: Arlo J. Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Wed Mar 23 2005 - 01:03:33 GMT

  • Next message: ian glendinning: "Re: MD Politics of MOQ Discuss"

    Ham,

    You say:

    > Music was never meant to be dissected and scrutinized for its
    > socio-political implications. It is an art form -- pure and simple -- and
    > it's obvious to me that

    But then you immediately say:

    your antagonists have neither the artistic
    > sensitivity nor the disposition to regard its elements as anything but
    > expressions of sexual debauchery, social rebellion, and general violence.

    I regard each musical song I hear as a unique representation of expression. Some
    I like, some I find disgusting. Many I appreciate for their social commentary,
    and many I appreciate because they are just fun (and as an adult in this
    nation, I am allowed to have fun, no?)

    Some rock I like, some I don't. Some polka I like, some I don't. Some
    "classical" I like, some I don't. Whatever my personal position on any
    particular "song", I am smart enough not to make idiotic claims than a
    particular genre is "degenerate" simply because I don't like it.

    Such vapid generalizations, such as saying "all bluegrass is degenerate, but all
    swing is not", only reveals deeper motives than honest critical inquiry.

    You write:
    > People who are predisposed to read "sex" into a hearing of Ravel's Bolero or
    Orff's Carmina Burana have no more appreciation of music than a dog has for
    Shakespeare's Sonnets.

    Thank you for your criticism of Bloom. I think you are dead on. Since he makes
    such a fuss about the "sex" in Bolero, it only indicates he has no appreciation
    of music. Thanks.

    You write:
     One should be able to enjoy the classics for the
    > sensual values they offer, not to affirm whatever innuendos may have been
    attributed to them by the critics.

    Why only "the classics"? Why not rock, bluegrass, jazz, salsa, the blues? Are
    only "the classics" exempt from criticism?

    You write:
     If your preference is for rock-and-roll
    > or heavy metal junkies, let's hope there's enough musical sense to discern the
    artistic merits. Otherwise, why bother?

    Agree. I am able to discern the artistic merits of The Clash or The Ramones. I
    am also able to discern the artistics mertis of Tommy Dorsey, Peggy Lee and
    Mozart.

    > It's one thing to put down religion and personal belief-systems in a
    > philosophical forum, but quite another to perpetuate a debate as to the
    > sordid affairs of the composers or the "political messages" they are
    > purported to be sending. That's not only childish, but totally beneath the
    > dignity of philosophical discourse;

    Who's doing this? I am only asking critical questions in response to Platt's
    assertation. His answers (or lack thereof) trap him in contradiction. That's
    "bad" for a philosophical discussion forum?

    You write:
    > Just for the record (vinyl or CD -- pardon the pun), and inasmuch as we have
    been chastised as "Victorians", my musical tastes range from popular show
    music, through the ballads of the '40s and '50s, and even include a (very) few
    young 'rebel' singers of the 'punk' variety. My favorite is the amazingly
    talented Alanis Morissette

    If you enjoy "the beat of sexual intercourse", you are obviously not a Victorian
    but a hippie, trippie flower child. :-)

    Sorry, couldn't resist. Honestly, though, why do you rage against "rock" but
    then purport to enjoy Morissette? I don't understand.

    You write:
    > Really, though, Platt -- can we dispense with the "punk rock" squabbling and
    get back to something at least remotely related to the subject at hand?

    Platt is bringing this back to the MOQ saying "rock is biological", and should
    be condemned as such. Do you think so? Is bluegrass? Swing? Jazz? Salsa? Polka?
    Why? Why not?

    > Thank you, Platt.
    > We shall overcome!

    Only if you can answer critical challenges to logical incoherent and vapid
    charges. You can't make assinine comments and then complain when they are
    challenged. You can't say "all rock is degenerate", and then say the statement
    can't be critically analyzed because "rock is an art form".

    You can't make sweeping generalizations about the "beat of sexual intercourse",
    but exempt the same beat in a song mentioned by the very person who's "logic"
    who hold so dear.

    These tricks may work on talk radio. But not here.

    Arlo

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 23 2005 - 01:07:24 GMT