Re: [microsound] culture, aesthetics and books

[lowercase <brad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> and don't bother too much unless you have trouble sleeping... Musicology as
> it stands is a dusty old discipline still trying to grapple with post
> notational musics... How many musicologists do you see at electronic music
> gigs?

diagree with the don't bother too much comment.  there is MUCH value in
understanding a philosophy of music breaks down in conjunction with
modern developments in music.  a fractured theory isn't a worthless
theory...

> Most musicologists don't listen to electronic music, let alone electronic
> music from the past ten years. This is somewhat curious situation, given

practice comes before theory...  i hardly think people understand the
full philsophical, artistic and cultural impact of a particular work of
their own.  while i don't have a problem with people who speak about the
philsophical and aesthetic influences and ideas in their work, i
traditionally let others evaluate and posit what might a more solid or
well formed conception of a work within a greater context.

> The only one I know is Doug Kahn, but he doesn't like being called a
> musicologist for the above reasons.

sounds like certain philosophers and cultural theorists of today. :)

> His work engages with post 19th century
> musics in the fullest context.. (ie phonography, recording practice, media
> alongside critical examinations of western art music etc..) It's a breath
> of fresh air. If anyone here hasn't read 'Noise Water Meat' on MIT Press
> yet, they should. Immaculate stuff with an incredible depth to the
> research. Its a page turner, which is pretty amazing for a book of this
> kind. I can't think of a better writer to recommend

i'll take a look at it. :)  thanks!!

brad
-- 
eddy, are you awake or not?