Re: Just one track ?

[Jim Morrison <jim_morrison@sprynet.com>]

From: "Elmer Elevator"


> Yeah, what Jacqueline said.

A big double helping of what Jacqueline and Elmer said.


Wow,

I'm amazed that people on this list would object to sharing of what others
might enjoy, even if it doesn't directly relate to Gould.

John Updike has written beautifully about Bach, and about the cello suites
in particular, in his novel the Witches of Eastwick.  The Swingle Singers
have also popped into his work as well, and they, were no doubt, part of the
Zeitgeist that produced Switched-on-Bach, the harpsipiano and Gould's Handel
on the harpsichord album.  Mark  Salzman and Updike share something with
Gould, an interest in Bach.  Perhaps people that listen to Gould (that's you
fminor) might also enjoy a baroque prose stylist such as Updike, but in case
you haven't read him, I encourage you to.  Look especially for his
collection "The Music School" and the short novel "Of the Farm."

John Updike's new story also touches upon treatment for depression, which
makes it related to William Styron's "Darkness Visible."  And speaking of
that book, how did it relate directly to Gould?  How did Brigitte's response
to Daniel Baldwin's comment on the source of the title coming from Milton
relate to Gould?  Why didn't Brigitte simply write back to Daniel, instead
of to the whole list, about the use of "made" in the phrase?  Why didn't she
stop herself from sending that Gouldless post to all of us?

I for one I'm glad that she didn't and think that her post was in no way
inappropriate on this list devoted to Gould.  I see this, as I said, as a
meeting place for people who share an interest in Gould, and like all
meeting places, think we should be open to just about any discussion topic.
There's no telling when and where something will come up that will help us
appreciate Gould or his great musical loves Bach and Schoenberg, or hell,
about LIFE for that matter.  Curiosity, connections, large scope, freedom of
expression, sharing with others.  Why not aim for those things?

Just recently off-list I made the analogy that I thought of Fminor as a
coffee shop plays Gould's music.  Why not shoot for that sort of atmosphere,
where people feel free to post what they want, knowing that what they post,
since it's written by a Gould fan to other Gould's fan could be of use and
interest to at least one other person on the list?

Keep on posting, but how about not telling some of us to be quiet and get
back on the track you and a few others on the list think we should be going.
Simply post something about the bassoon music if you want to start a new
thread.  Why bother to tell people that shouldn't be writing what they are
before you do it?



Here's an analogy.  When you get spam in your box, do you bother to write
back to the people/company that sent it?  or do you simply hit the delete
button?  Why not be friendly on this fan based list and simply hit the
delete button instead of writing back to the sender?  How are you hurt by a
few posts which don't relate to Gould?  Why do some of you prefer silence on
the list?  Why, on a list that hasn't seen much Gould traffic in the last
few weeks, object to a few emails on different subjects?  Why, when you see
some of us having fun with it, learning from it, would you object?  I don't
understand that attitude.

Why take the first steps in turning this very friendly forum into what it is
looking like now, that is, people discussing what they should and shouldn't
be able to post?  Why not simply let people post what they want to?  When
has it ever been a real problem?  Why not let the list owner, Mary Jo Watts,
be in charge of that, who recently sent us a link to the transcription to
the Idea of North.

Thanks Mary Jo, that must have taken quite a while.  I'm curious, why did
you do it?

Bye,

Jim