From: Matthew Glesne (mglesne_at_sbcglobal.net)
Date: 2004-06-26 22:51:53
--- Steve <scatanzaro4_at_cox.net> wrote:
> ok matt, let's keep the rant going;
ok, i apprecaite the reasoned discussion...
> first, you're right that military inventions =
> socialism, more or less.
> i only put that in there because the only area where
> western socialists
> ever want to seem to cut is military and defense.
> BUT;
you seem to be implying that we are foolish for
wanting to cut the military... $2,500 of you and i's
(the average taxpayer's) taxes go to develop new ways
to kill people each year, when maybe a few dollars
goes to arts and culture. (a few pennies to the NEA or
Public Broadcasting)
> the theramin is a good example of socialist
> technology. it doesn't do
> much, it's impractical, esoteric, and most
> importantly, it never went
> anywhere. compare the original theramin to a current
> theramin.. now look
> at moog's first vca, and the minimoog. both
> inventors came up with an
> original, if esoteric, technology. moog was able to
> change the face of
> music by developing his vca in such a way that the
> average gigging
> musician could get his hands on it and use it.
> theramin remains a
> footnote. (new theramins are available, btw.
> courtesy of bob moog!)
i mentioned the theramin because it was the mother
technology for all the moogs and synths to come. i
stand by the assertion that most useful science and
technology comes out of government sponsored research.
western companies cherry-pick the most promnising
stuff and are given the proprietory research for
basically nothing because of the system's logic of
helping private corporations.
> as for cuba, thanks to fidel, "having the richest
> depository of skilled
> musicians in the world." yeah, sosa and rubalcalba
> are great; so are
> meldhau and jason moran and geoff keezer and about
> 500 other pianists I
> could name that grew up in capitalist society.
> further, I don't know how
> it could be tested, but I'd say the average Japanese
> has more music
> education than the average Cuban. I heard there were
> over 9000 yamaha
> music schools in japan. which is roughly the number
> of subway sandwich
> stores in the us.
ok i know it was a claim without hard basis, but i
suspect if you were to go (and everyone SHOULD) you
might agree. i'd also argue that cuba has the highest
level of popular music in the world. another
unverifiable assertion, but the music on the radio in
cuba is miles beyond what you hear today in other
countries like brazil or japan. the complexity, the
raw energy, the newness, the diversity, the
combinations... compared the pop radio i heard in say
brazil or venezuela or japan.
> the real question would be, would the AVERAGE Cuban
> musician be better
> if, for instance, he/she had access to modern
> technology? what kind of
> piano did omar sosa play on, btw? probably Yamaha!
that is a false question. of course they would be
better with better equipment. and many do have this
access, but many must improvise - because of the
embargo and other higher priorities. however, i just
found an article in TIME that told about the Ministry
of Culture providing drum machines and samplers to a
bunch of people, studios and organizations to promote
hip-hop for the masses. i knew it happens because
people told me there, but i found some proof:
http://www.time.com/time/musicgoesglobal/la/mhavana.html.
the real question is would a promising musician in
the poor inner city or rural areas be more likely to
develop his/her talent in the US or Cuba.
i agree that socialism is not going to produce the
musical technology for the future - they may very well
cure many dieases though, or revolutionize organic
argriculture or even cure aids (which would be a
blessing for humanity). they have already developed
the cure for meningitis, a long way towards hepatisis
and even cancer (which us citizens can not receive).
us companies go for things that will bring a profit,
devloping treatments not cures. tiny cuba is trying to
help humanity - the most vulnerable of us first.
> as for needing lots of money to study. wf buckley
> once said, "life
> cannot be all bad, when, for $50, you can buy all 32
> beethoven sonatas,
> and listen to them for 5 years." now days, if u have
> a computer and
> $9.95 a month, u can access a massive world-class
> selection of music via
> rhapsody or other download services (not to mention
> all the freebies
> that are out there.)
yeah, the david brooks or john stossel philosophy of
capitalism... can't be so bad then the poor can afford
a microwave and tv (even though millions do not). my
point was about study - which buying CDs or the
internet can not provide. instruction is what i was
talking about - and this is not even possible in many
public schools any more. the average cuban 12 year old
would smoke ours out of the water in musical
education.
> as for lesser markets. funny, i was out in phoenix
> last nite, and I
> heard jazzanova at a club u could only describe as
> bourgeoisie!!! to say
> that "the masses" need the state to get hip to
> jazzanova is silly. got
> news 4 ya. the proletariat in the heartland r
> rocking plasma screens,
> satellite dishes, and 5.1 surround!
and...? you can not buy culture.
> if your theory was correct, the only people who
> would be successful
> musicians in a capitalist society would be sons and
> daughters of the
> wealthy. this is decidedly not true. in fact, it
> never has been. ray
> charles, born rich? nat cole? charlie parker? huh?
> do u have to be rich
> to make an album in a capitalist society nowdays?
it is becoming more and more true i would argue. name
me a significant new artist from the ghetto or small
town besides hip-hop. i'd argue that even (innovative)
hip-hop is a somewhat more middle class. again, you'll
probably think that i am being elitist, but there IS
good and bad (innovative and no-innovative) music. a
grassroots based state financed culture ministry can
recognize this... not fidel. i find it amazing that
most would put our cultural heritage in the hands of
the mass market rather than those who know better.
> look at the result of all the ominous signs
> socialists pointed to, a
> world controlled by starbucks, clear channel, and
> wallmart. the fact is,
> your "big city" socialist view doesn't take into
> account that half the
> country has a high speed modem and access to more
> music and radio shows
> than could have been dreamed of even 10 years ago!!!
you can have the best access in the world (as
americans often do) and capitalism can render this
largely moot because we don't have the cultural basis.
> finally, here's the most dangerous sentence in your
> post, imho, and the
> real reason I am a capitalist.
>
> u say, in cuba, If students show promise they are
> given training and
> attention there that only the rich get here.
>
> consider this statement. if students show promise,
> according to who? the
> state says, "this is a promising musician" based on
> the state's (i.e.
> fidel's) criteria. hell, capitalism will produce a
> new style of music
> that a socialist state doesn't even recognize as
> music while the
> socialists are still trying to codify their
> "promising musician"
> criteria.
music is not like boxing or something, i agree with
you that it is more subtle. but i would not abandon
the tastes of a union of raperos (hip-hoppers as they
have in cuba) in deciding who is going to be on the
hip-hop fesitval line-up or receive studio time, in
favor of the US mass market.
> but let me ask u a question. who's going further in
> music, the one with
> "promising talent" or the one with the most fire and
> desire?
>
> in the '70's, there was a great soviet weightlifter
> named alexyev. his
> story showed the "superiority" of the soviet system,
> where his natural
> talent was seized upon at a young age, and he was
> given expert training
> his whole life.
>
> in America in the '70's, there was a great baseball
> player named pete
> rose. after his team, the reds (heh heh), won their
> second world series,
> they asked rose's manager if he was the greatest
> player he ever saw. the
> manager, Anderson, responded, "he's the greatest
> player I ever saw with
> no talent."
>
> pete rose would've probably never made it as an
> athlete under the soviet
> system. by the time he was 13 years old, he would've
> been shipped to
> some fishpacking school someplace.
ha.... trust me, pete rose would have made it in
socialism too. drive and ambitions are not lost on
socialist baseball coaches.
> human potential, desire, talent, genius, etc. can
> not be quantified via
> the state!!! it is 2 individual, imprecise.
again, i think you have a overly simplified notion of
socialism, trying to quantify talent using science and
all that. maybe socialists believed in this at one
time, but things are more organic than you would
think. if someone's neighbors, or a techer or a local
musician is impressed by someone, that what i am
talking about, in terms of being recognized... not
some minister plucking people from recital halls.
> look at the the eastern european classicists, henryk
> gorecki and arvo
> paart. they sold more records then ALL the socialist
> professors of
> music, western and elsewhere. why? because when
> union of socialist
> republics imploded, they turned away from the
> academism of their
> "complicated" days and towards simple, soulful,
> spiritual music. I
> actually heard a socialist music professor yell out
> "why this man part
> and his old fashioned music has caused such a stir
> is beyond me!' more
> grist for his socialist mill. ie, mass consumption =
> whackness.
well, i don't know that much about classical music,
but my guess is that simplicity and soulfulness are
not the measures most critics would use to define
innovation or moving the genre forward.
> and one final point. cuba is a magic island, no
> doubt. but what kind of
> musical life did cuba have b4 fidel? giving 1 man
> credit for the prowess
> of a nation that was swinging well b4 he came on the
> scene. silly. like
> giving hirohito credit for japan's extremely strong
> musical life.
it's true there is something in the water down there,
but the fact is that there are many more
conservancies, art schools, (well stocked schools
period), venues, etc. for music now thanks to the
revolution... and of course, they are for the masses,
not the white/mulatto elite who's LPs made it to
America's record bins in the 50s.
respect
matt
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew Glesne [mailto:mglesne_at_sbcglobual.net]
>
> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 12:52 PM
> To: acid-jazz_at_ucsd.edu
> Subject: Re: [acid-jazz] has capitalism ruined
> music?
>
> steve, steve, steve
> you have touched a nerve on this fair socialist, so
> please forgive if i
> get a little ranty myself.
>
> you base your hypothesis - that capitalism is *good*
> for music on the
> basis of
> 1) that equipment was made in "capitalist
> countries." Yet you
> immediately discredit that theory with your
> observation that much of the
> d technology was developed in military laboratories
> - or (i would
> strongly guess) research laboratories. That may
> sound capitalist, but of
> course, the military and university research
> facilities are some of the
> lone bastions of socialism in western countries.
> Massive state
>
=== message truncated ===