RE: [microsound] machine soul: oxymoron?

[Philip Sherburne <philip@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

[Sorry, hit send too soon]

> Ok, now I'm just going to be mean, because it's early and I haven't had
> enough coffee yet.  A search on Goldberg's other work at Salon turns up
> this
> recent gem:
> 
>William Orbit's "Pieces in a Modern
>Style," is quite beguiling. Orbit's record isn't a music appreciation
>class for ravers, an attempt to bring Art with a capital A to the
>kids. Nor is it a ploy to increase electronic music's credibility by
>proving that it's just as classy as a string quartet. Rather, the
>album treats its source material -- which includes pieces from
>Beethoven, Ravel, Handel and Vivaldi, as well as modernists like
>Erik Satie and John Cage -- with a lively respect that's much
>different from fossilizing reverence. It points out a certain
>continuity between classical and electronic music, especially in the
>way both rely on the repetition and elaboration of motifs, but it
>does it without being didactic.

[ah yes... i love the elaboration of motifs.  something classical and
electronic music do especially well.  i just LOVE the motifs on the new Alva
Noto CD.  such motifs!]

Here's a thought, and a serious question, all my carping aside.  Why is it
that mainstream pubs like Salon always feel compelled, when covering any
form of electronic music (from big beat to extreme glitch) to begin by
presenting electronic music as Other?  They can never just dive in and start
talking about the music in and of itself; they always have to begin with
some intro sentence setting it apart from "normal" music (aka Rock).  Take,
for example, the intro to Andy Battaglia's review of "Clicks & Cuts" on
Salon (surprised to see it, frankly):  Much to its credit, electronic dance
music has always played fast and loose with its own history. A hugely
sprawling form hyped on progress, it seems to announce a new aesthetic
revolution every few weeks....And even if, like the high sciences, these
variations get parsed out in a language largely impenetrable to those not
obsessed with obscure nuance, at the very least they stand in for
electronica's heartening faith in meaningful change."  

First of all, somewhat amusing to see Battaglia's idealistic take on
electronic music set against Goldberg's jaded critique.  And while I
appreciate his favorable review, I reiterate my question:  why the hell does
every electronic music review in a mag like Salon have to begin from outside
the work, looking at the genre through a telescope?