Klarinet Archive - Posting 000627.txt from 1997/12

From: Roger Garrett <rgarrett@-----.edu>
Subj: Re: Practitioner vs. Musician
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 06:19:44 -0500

On Thu, 11 Dec 1997, Neil Leupold wrote:

> This is a very interesting statement, and (in my opinion) well-worth
> discussing. The question: Is it true what Melissa Norman says? Do
> the sounds that come out of an instrument constitute music by default,
> or is there an additional ingredient involved which qualifies those
> sounds as such? [snip]

> How do others feel about these ideas?

Some interesting questions and thoughts. The only thing that ran through
my mind was the big uproar that happened a few years ago when the National
Endowment for the Arts paid an artist's commission who then turned around
and produced a crucifix (I think) in a jar of urine as his central
masterpiece. The whole nation went ballistic! A long battle over what
determines art vs. vulgarities ensued.....and the NEA began the long
chore of defining what they would and would not fund. The whole issue was
over artistic merit and censureship. Your question regarding sounds out
of an instrument, while not quite the same comparison, seems like a
parrallel to me - I am curious about opinions.

Roger Garrett
IWU