Re: Re: different editions of 4'33'' â?¹ Warn ing, rant ahead

[Jim Morrison <jim_morrison@sprynet.com>]

okay list, I'm know that maybe three of you will want to read this, the rest
of you please forgive me ( and how about remembering all those other
Gouldian posts I've made in the past (the entire listing to the Glenn Gould
Collection Video series being one I'm particularly proud off) and hit the
delete button)


Evalynne wrote

> I'm really sick of reading
> about this no-talent faker. This is a Gould list. Perhaps there's a list
for
> discussion of the no-talent Cage.


Once again, if you look at the books written about Gould you'll see
references to Cage and comparisons made of the two.

So tell me, why is it that writers who have studied Gould and music for
years can see a connection but others on this list can't?  Why do you find
it so offensive when a few of us take up a topic that books on Gould also
touch upon?   If the Glenn Gould magazine will have an article especially
written for them that makes connections between the two, why is it some
people keep refusing, without having studied Cage or modern art, to see any
comparison, and actually telling others on the list to stop talking about it
in quite a rude and public manner?  Why can't people do that offlist instead
of sending it to all 312 of us?  It makes me want to do things like this,
defend myself in public.

Why not try to tell us what is wrong with the comparisons instead of simply
saying that they are wrong and shouldn't have been made in the first place?
Why not try to help us see your point of view instead of yelling at us and
Cage and people who think he made have had a clever idea or two?

Once again, what's so wrong about discussing the possible
connections between the two?  I was discussing Gould and the cultural
climate from which he arose, and more specifically, another composer/artist
who is frequently considered, like Gould, a bit off and not important to the
classical mainstream?  I don't understand this negative attitude towards
inquiry and conversation.  Just how many people have to be interested in a
Gouldian thread in order for it to be proper conversation for the list?  Is
there a minimum I don't know about?


Jim (who enjoyed Sean's post, which I think is right on)

(and by the way Evalynne if you'd bothered to read  more closely to some of
these posts on Cage you'd know there is a Cage mailing list.  Bob sent it to
us.  Do any of you people that are so critical of Cage know much about him
or his compositions or the zeitgeist which Gould emerged from, Cage being a
part of it?

and I see that every message Evalynne sends has a link to her lamps
that are for sale.  What does that have to do with Gould?  not that I'm
against it. I'm just saying
that some of us aren't as free from making no-relationship-to-Gould emails
as we might think.)


and please send any flames straight to me and stop doing it over the list.
Why bother the others with this matter?