Klarinet Archive - Posting 000673.txt from 1997/12

From: Bill Hausmann <bhausman@-----.com>
Subj: Re: Practitioner vs. Musician
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 19:16:54 -0500

At 05:19 AM 12/12/97 -0600, Roger Garrett wrote:
>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.
>
It seems to me that one can make whatever musical or artistic statement one
wants, but must be willing to accept criticism, derision, apathy, or
whatever in response to it. The Maplethorpe et al. controversy concerned
whether or not it was the taxpayers responsibility, regardless of merit and
without prior approval or right of rejection, to PAY for the stuff. Kenny
G., of course, is not taxpayer funded, and apparently does not need to be.
I wonder how many of those crucifixes would be sold at normal retail
gallery prices (without the free publicity from the controversy)? While
commercial acceptance certainly does not equate with artistic merit,
neither does it preclude same. Since I have the option to take it or leave
it, I can buy what, to me, is art (or music) and leave the rest to rot.

Bill Hausmann bhausman@-----.com
451 Old Orchard Drive http://www.concentric.net/~bhausman
Essexville, MI 48732 http://members.wbs.net/homepages/z/o/o/zoot14.html
ICQ UIN 4862265

If you have to mic a saxophone, the rest of the band is too loud.