Klarinet Archive - Posting 000039.txt from 2000/07

From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subj: [kl] Annette Morreau's article
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2000 02:49:28 -0400

After Lelia's second response, which surprised me -- though I now see it
shouldn't have -- I think I have to fill in the detailed background to
all of this. Lelia's concerns in her second response are important
ones, but ones that weren't at all going through my mind when I posted
Annette's article. If they had been, I might have responded to Lelia's
first response with more understanding.

Annette Morreau is an old friend of mine. Among very many things to her
credit, she was responsible in the 70's here in Britain for setting up
and running the Arts Council Contemporary Music Network, which provided
a platform for concerts of the best of new music around the country, in
many of which concerts I played. She has also worked in television.
Recently she has been writing reviews and articles for the Independent,
which is one of the four major British newspapers, along with the Times,
the Guardian and the Daily Telegraph, as well as researching a book on
Feuermann, as I said.

At dinner recently at my house, she mentioned that two of our colleagues
had separately written letters to the Independent supporting her
article/review about the 'dumbing down' of classical music. I hadn't
seen either letter or article, but we thought the article at any rate
was probably available on the web, so I went to look. I failed to find
it, as did she later that evening at her own home, which surprised and
rather irritated her. The upshot was that she mailed it to me. I
thanked her, and said that I would at least send it to the Klarinet
list.

Now it is true that I didn't ask her formally for permission to do this.
But she raised no objection when I said that I intended posting it; and
anyway such permission was, I would say, implicit in our previous
discussion of the matter. "I think I should probably complain that it
isn't on the Independent site," she had said.

She is quite concerned, as am I, about the implications of the
assumption, becoming more widespread here, that classical music needs to
*change itself* in order to be thought worthy of attracting an audience.
It seems to me that her article expresses that concern very effectively
and amusingly -- better than I could, at any rate.

Now, Lelia is also concerned about this matter I am sure, and certainly
no less able to express herself effectively and amusingly. (Lelia's
possible response was one of the things I had in mind when I posted, in
fact.) But my mistake was to fail to see how lack of an explicit
statement of permission to post the article must have appeared to Lelia
within the context of her recent explanation of 'fair use' quoting. So
I'm sorry about that.

The truth is, it simply didn't cross my mind. I just found it a bit
strange that Lelia, responding, appeared not to understand the structure
of my post. Whereas, as now appears, she was just fishing -- perhaps a
little obscurely? -- for some explanation of how I came to think I could
possibly post someone else's article here in the first place.

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

.... Bored at 3:00 a.m.? PSSSTTT - got a modem?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org