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