Klarinet Archive - Posting 001166.txt from 1998/11

From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subj: Re: [kl] Absolutes
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 00:55:08 -0500

On Mon, 30 Nov 1998 19:00:24 -0500, secondtimearound@-----.net said:

> I am so sorry you did not learn anything from my (or most probably)
> Lelia's post, Tony.

As my post to Lelia indicated, I found what she had to say very
interesting. I disagreed with her assessment of the discussion she was
commenting on, but what else she said was well worth reading.

> That's a shame. What you should have gleaned from my response is that
> you should get over being in a "snit" and move on, right or wrong.

But you see, Christina, I'm not a mind reader. You tell me this, but I
couldn't have deduced it from your "Hear, hear!", plus a load of stuff
behind a load of chevrons:-)

But actually, I disagree with you. It's not a question of being in a
"snit" at all.

There are two distinct issues: disagreements of opinion, and
irresponsible dealings with disagreements of opinion.

You (perhaps) think that what has just gone on between Roger Garrett and
myself is a disagreement of opinion. But it isn't. It's a question of
responsible or irresponsible discourse. And that's important, in a way
that disagreement of opinion isn't. I know that it's difficult to
distinguish between the two sometimes, but I think the effort is
worthwhile. The difference between responsible and irresponsible
discourse makes a big difference in the world. So we have to try to
learn to recognise it.

> Had I been aware that your time was so very valuable, or that my one
> line response was out of place, I would not have responded. I merely
> supported what Lelia wrote.

My time in fact is not so very valuable at the moment. And even if
it were very valuable at the moment, I'd make the time to discuss with
you, publicly or privately, anything you want.

Or not, if you didn't.

> Please, forgive me! Then you wasted even more of your time writing
> your caustic response. I "admit" to nothing. Even someone with my
> limited background is entitled to her opinion. This is not
> exclusively the Tony Pay forum!

My response was not intended to be caustic. Nor indeed did you proffer
an opinion, I think. I just wanted to hear what *you* had to say, and
now I have, or at least the beginning of it.

> You are, ordinarily, such a valuable contributor, and I look forward
> to seeing your name in the "sender" portion of the e-mail, followed
> by your excellent advice. I may rethink this.

Do you mean, you may rethink what you just wrote, or you may rethink
that you look forward to what I write?

If the latter, I think you might rather decide whether the advice is
valuable by looking at what the advice is.

I have no wish for it to be the Tony Pay forum either. But I will
represent what I'm committed to, here.

Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd Tony@-----.uk
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE
tel/fax 01865 553339

"...his playing soars so freely, one is aware of witchcraft without
noticing a single magical gesture."
(C.D.F.Schubart on the harpsichord playing of C.P.E.Bach)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------