Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site tekecs.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!tektronix!orca!tekecs!jeffw From: jeffw@tekecs.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) Newsgroups: net.music,net.music.classical Subject: Re: Progress, the Arts, and Razor Blades Message-ID: <5156@tekecs.UUCP> Date: Fri, 1-Mar-85 12:14:40 EST Article-I.D.: tekecs.5156 Posted: Fri Mar 1 12:14:40 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 4-Mar-85 08:08:39 EST References: <8347@brl-tgr.ARPA> <109@spar.UUCP> Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR Lines: 19 Xref: watmath net.music:6349 net.music.classical:945 Shall we all take a vote on what "progress" means? Shall we move that discussion to some net.nlang? Shall we ask too many stupid questions, like this one? I agree with michael ellis in this sense: People never change (well, hardly ever). There is nothing intrinsically more moving (which, after all, is what music is all about) in the final moments of "Lulu" than there is in a Gesualdo madrigal, for example. Or vice versa. All that is required is a sympathetic ear in each case. On the other hand, there is progress in the sense that, as time goes on, people's musical imagination expands. On the average, people accept wilder and wilder sounds as part of that set called "music". (Well, some people do, anyway.) One might say that the heart never changes, but the brain learns new techniques, so there is some appearance of progress. Jeff Winslow