Keith Weston wrote:
>[I wrote:] 
> > 2) I obviously have a different attitude towards music than you do. I
> > *do* believe local music is more deserving of my attention than other
> > music, because it's being made in my community, by people who are my
> > neighbors, and whose experiences are therefore often more closely in
> > tune with my own.
> 
> Yikes.  That's a somewhat frightening, or at least, troubling statement if
> you deconstruct it and really think about it.
>
If what you're implying is some kind of veiled musical xenophobia on my
part, then well, whatever. I'm not going to start whipping out my
world-music credentials or anything like that. But just let me say that
it would only be "frightening" if I were, say, Music Director at one of
the local stations, AND I motivated my beliefs about what *I* like to
hear in the performance of my duties.

Otherwise, big fuckin deal. I like what I like, eh? I do the local music
show at a local station. All works out nicely in the end.

I mean, "frightening" is confessing a continuing soft spot for Kansas's
"Carry On." eeek. Gives me shivers just thinking about it ;-)

> Granted.  I tend to be more interested in the end-project than its
> development.  And, I tend to by and large be much more interested in the
> record, the document than the live performance.

See, there you and I sort of differ. I'm more inclined to separate out
live performance from records, and get different buzzes off of each one.
Make whatever analogy feels best: stock-car racing vs. Grand Prix, if
you will. Different rules, different high and low points. Both loud and
occasionally really fun. And the places where the two worlds converge
just provide *extra* zing for me.

  I am in total agreement
> with Glenn Gould on the issue of live performance, even for popular music
> forms.
> 
I'd ask you to elaborate, but I can just go to yr homepage and jump to
the Sony Glenn Gould page from there.

>  Truely worthwhile music transcends the local,
> transcends the music made by your friends, transcends communitarian
> experiences.  If anything, knowing the people who make the music is a
> liability, a distraction from the music qua music.

Depends. Music for me is perhaps most interesting because it's a product
of humanity, and of human fallibility. It's amazing to see someone up
onstage actually using their hands/mouth/body to make music. It is for
me extra-fun when they fuck up, as folks always do, and then recover
majestically, or veer off in an unexpected direction because of it. 

I don't know either way about the effects of knowing the people who make
the music--I've got good friends in shitty bands, minor acquaintances in
great bands, and vice versa. I'm still pretty good at telling the
difference between good and shitty (cue 3.2.3 jumping in to maintain
that there *is* none).

But for me it's the knowing *THAT* people make the music which is
crucial.

> Thanks, Grady.  I've enjoyed the exchange.  I'm glad I'm not like the
> "like-minded" people on this list.  I expect to continue to contribute,
> though.

Likewise. Just make sure you continue to cc:
ch-scene@listserv.oit.unc.edu. It helps enormously with those weird
propagation problems. (see URL below for details, sort of).

Ross
-- 
Got questions about alt.music.chapel-hill? Curious why you only 
ever seem to see *replies* to posts, but never the original post? 
The answer to these and (someday) many other questions can be 
found in the FAQ:  http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/factory