Re: [microsound] an age of immaterial reproduction

[jeff gburek <tsazmaniac@xxxxxxxxx>]

> Where I think the danger area lies, and where jeff's
> comment is related, is
> whether the development of music is hindered by the
> introduction of
> non-musical (perhaps anti-intuitive, or even
> destructive) motivation or
> influence.

this is the direction i hoped to push the debate. the
destructive elements i find are that artists force
themselves into genre. even if they feel free in their
ideas to develop music when it comes to placing
something in a market, they are forced into the
categoricals of the market place. this is owed to the
fact that we really are not pursuing vigorously enough
i kind of stance that is highly resistant to this
blurb propaganda routine (which as such, is passed off
as journalism in some music publications). a further
danger i have see is with art works that pursue
funding of the art world (museums and galleries funded
either by state and corporations) and where the work
starts to resemble corporate decoration and uphold
corporate values, making the suits feel good. i would
like to hear more about people making work that is not
geared toward reinforcing these value systems. i am
even actually in favor of artists that pursue placemen
of workt in such contexts in order to plant implicit
critiques.
jeff gburek 

j.ff gbk

http://www.futurevessel.com/orphansound/

http://www.mattin.org/desetxea.html

http://www.djalma.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org