Article View: comp.music
Article #3437composition is dead?
From: Vance Maverick
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1991 16:18
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1991 16:18
9 lines
1199 bytes
1199 bytes
In article <11273@idunno.Princeton.EDU>, eliot@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Eliot Handelman) writes: |> [lots of relevant if extravagantly phrased stuff about listening] |> And last of all "composition" is dead, |> significant music is not made that way anymore. Oh yes? I'm almost sure that (1) you've made the case for this rather ominously proscriptive claim before, and (2) that you probably mean something milder and seek in your vehemence primarily to get our goats, but (hey) I'll allow my goat to be gotten. How do you know I can't make "significant" music by composing? And how do you know when music is significant anyway? Citation? Record sales? Vance
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1991Jun27.161828.17195@agate.berkeley.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!agate!mahogany.Berkeley.EDU!maverickReferences:
<25951@samsung.samsung.com> <11273@idunno.Princeton.EDU>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!agate!mahogany.Berkeley.EDU!maverick From: maverick@mahogany.Berkeley.EDU (Vance Maverick) Newsgroups: comp.music Subject: composition is dead? Message-ID: <1991Jun27.161828.17195@agate.berkeley.edu> Date: 27 Jun 91 16:18:28 GMT References: <25951@samsung.samsung.com> <11273@idunno.Princeton.EDU> Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator) Organization: UC Berkeley, University of California at Berkeley Lines: 9