Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site tellab1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!tellab1!etan
From: etan@tellab1.UUCP (Nate Stelton)
Newsgroups: net.music
Subject: In defense of musical snobbery
Message-ID: <246@tellab1.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 11-Jun-84 14:41:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: tellab1.246
Posted: Mon Jun 11 14:41:29 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 12-Jun-84 01:27:00 EDT
Organization: Tellabs, Inc., Lisle, Ill.
Lines: 43

After reading Peter Merchant's article, I thought, "Well put, Pete."
However I go through musical snob phases on a week to week basis, so
I thought about the times that I have implied to others that they should
listen to better music and asked myself why. While I can't condone such
actions, I do think that some of the reasons the "snobs" (and I'm too
confused to decide whether to include myself or not) impose their tastes
should be brought to light.

For the sake of simplicity, let me divide musical snobs into two
categories: snob musicians, and snob listeners. (I'm getting tired of the
word 'snob', so I'll refrain from overusing it.)

Some musicians are driven by their love of the art form to the point of
working their asses off in school for four or more years, studying under
gurus privately (and I do mean gurus as opposed to ordinary private
instructors), spending their life's savings on that one special
instrument, practicing hours a day, year after year, and generally
sacrificing a 'normal' life for music. I would say that among these
people, there is a general consensus concerning the quality of top 40.
Many of these people have a very difficult time making even a meager
living. How do they feel when they hear that Michael Jackson makes more
money in one night than they probably will over the next ten years? All
they can say is "Hey, listen to me... please?".

Some listeners find enjoyment in the compositions and performances of the
aforementioned musicians. Unfortunately, they are rarely blessed with the
opportunity to experience a live performance by them because the artist
can't afford to tour to their city. When they go to the record shop to
pick up a recording, It is most likely not available or discontinued due
to lack of sales (i.e. it wasn't a platinum or gold). Many record
companies are not interested in new acts if they do not feel that it will
compete in the top 40, hence much of the 'serious' music is not made available
to any of the record buying public. The snob listener then thinks "I
wish more people would listen to good stuff."

But who's to blame? You can't deny the public their right to choose the
music they listen to. By the same token, the record companies have to
make a buck in order to feed their families. Hey, maybe we can dump all
the blame on the radio stations. Do they decide what America listens to?
I don't know. Does anybody out there have an answer?

                               -etan