about that Brian McLaren in Tuning digest 893...

In early November I had rushed surgery to remove
a large agressive cyst from my left thigh. Needless to say,
now that that huge thing is gone (no cancer), the whole process
has been a pain in the leg. (Funny, where is he going with this?)

This evening I was catching up on Tuning digest since I've
been busy recovering and catching up the back load
of work in my family business. To my suprise, I found myself
as an example in one McLaren's charming rants.

In an article titled "WWW and microtonality"
and posted on Tue, 12 Nov 1996 09:19:05 -0800 (PST)
the ever charming Brian McLaren writes:

>Here are 3 horrible examples of what
>I'm talking about:
>[1] " Two CD reviews
>DMB5561719@aol.com
>Sat, 1 Apr 95 17:49:18-0800
>Message sorted by [date][thread][subject]
>[author]
> Next messages John H. Chalmers: "Another
>post from McLaren"
>Previous message: John H. Chalmers "Post
>from Brian"
>
>In tuning digest I never see enough reviews
>of microtonal rcordsings. Here is my
>contribution, a few things I haven't seen
>anywhere else.
>(etc.)
>--
>That was the verbatim text of the start of an actual web page.
>First, look at the uninformative header:
>"Two CD reviews." What KIND of CDs?
>Second: look at all the header junk. Who cares about
>the internet adress, who cares about the date?

If you can't even guess why this information is there,
you aren't in much of a position to comment! Understand?

>Post that crud--if you have to--at the *end* of the website, *not*
>the first couple of lines. Third: look at all the garbage! "Messages
>sorted by..." "Next message..." "Previous message..."
>Totally content-free! And even in the body of the website
>we get vaguely worded mush that tells the average person nothing:
>"In tuning digest I never see enough reviews of
>microtona recordings. Here is my contribution, a few things I haven't..."
>yadda-yadda-yadda.

Yadda-yadda-yadda? Look who's talking! Understand?

>Imagine it--10 lines of text, and the web surfer *still* doesn't have the
>faintest idea WHAT THE HELL THIS WEB PAGE IS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT.

Check it out: a guy who doesn't even own a modem criticizing
a web page I didn't create in a forum I couldn't respond to
because I was recovering from surgery. Ha!

I don't know who has been taking old posts of mine to Tuning
Digest and making web pages out of 'em. If web neophyte
McLaren wants to whine, he should get his own damn web
pages. First, however, he will need a modem and an isp.

Understand?

He can look at my own web pages and check out
my work. I spent a lot of time on those pages. About 60 or 70
pages worth. While Juxtaposition Ezine is for reviews,
not all the reviews are JI oriented.

* * * yet another shameless promo!!! * * *

He's also welcome to purchase a copy of A Recital Without
Musicians: The 1995 Trenton Avant-Garde Festival
Electro-Acoustic compilation. This tape has my JI composition
"Science Friction" using the intervals:

1/1, 17/16, 9/8, 19/16, 5/4, 21/16, 11/8, 3/2, 13/8, 27/16, 7/4, 15/8.

See the IMMP site for more details.

* * * end of shameless promo * * *

I been on the Tuning list for about 2 1/2 years and I am well
acquainted with BM's writings and the reaction they provoke.
I normally wouldn't waste my time responding to BM, but
since he made a special effort to pick me out of millions
on the net, I'm putting in my 1200 cents.

One request: maybe BM could stay on topic?
The forum IS about tunings other then 12tet.

Wow! I managed to get this far and not call him any names.

Sorry to waste the bandwidth folks...

say cheese,
D a v i d B e a r d s l e y .. dmb5561719@aol.com
* .. * ... .* .... *...... .
* .. I M M P & B i i n k! m u s i c
http://www.xingnet.com/immp/welcome.htm
. .. . * .. . . .. . . . . .. .*..
J u x t a p o s i t i o n Ezine * . ..
http://www.xingnet.com/immp/jux/j_index.htm
. .. .*.. . .. . ..*. . .. . *. .

Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Mon, 2 Dec 1996 07:33 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA14126; Mon, 2 Dec 1996 07:35:02 +0100
Received: from eartha.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA14091
Received: from by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
for id WAA05653; Sun, 1 Dec 1996 22:34:54 -0800
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 1996 22:34:54 -0800
Message-Id: <199612020631.XAA19478@freenet.uchsc.EDU>
Errors-To: madole@ella.mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu

I have a quick commentary on Neil's post regarding lack of musical excitement
in microtonal music.

First of all, I agree that there's a very real problem there. That's why
I've been taking up the real saxophone recently - so that I can try to regain
the raw performance skill I've lost over the last several years of theorizing
and composing.

Second, I would take Neil's concern one step farther in one particular
direction: Some of us will just have to accept that we're not cut out for
certain types of musical pursuit, and take some other form of microtonal
pursuit. I have to accept that that may even end up applying to me with regard
to producing CDs of my music. I haven't given up by any stretch of the
imagination, and am thus improving my chops in order to remedy that particular
problem.

Whether and when to give up is something that each of us has to decide for
himself, the hard part being figuring out how to take constructive criticism.
It's very easy to either give up entirely, rather than doing the hard work of
locating the SPECIFIC problem and fixing it. And on the other end of spectrum
it's easy also to ignore the criticism entirely, which is usually a very bad
idea. The difficulty of that task is compounded by the fact that SOMETIMES
(although not often), some constructive criticism really SHOULD be ignored
entirely or serve as a sign that you really should COMPLETELY give.

But perhaps even more important is, if you do give up on performing,
composing, or whatever, to find some other area where you CAN contribute.

Third, I think it's important to note the difference between Neil's criticism
here and some of the other postings with a critical tone (and no, I'm not
refering to any single person here). Neil's critique has carefully avoided
mentioning specific names in this public forum. He has clearly reserved that
for person-to-person direct communication. He also clearly mentioned his own
weaknesses as well, that he's primarily a performer over a theorist. Neil has
also taken that fact into account in his own persuits too: He hasn't created
any new tuning systems that I know of, but has instead exploited his true
talent, which is performance. That's admirable.

Fourth and finally, I think it's important to follow up critiques of this
sort with specific person-to-person critique. I say that because this sort of
posting is bound to raise a lot of questions in peoples' minds in addition to
Neil's main aim, which is to ask us to just generally practice our trade more
than trade it. A lot of people are probably asking "hmmm... who is thus and so
sentence in particular refering to?" So I hope that he and others will do an
effective follow-up as well.


Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Tue, 3 Dec 1996 02:35 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA28055; Tue, 3 Dec 1996 02:37:02 +0100
Received: from eartha.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA26667
Received: from by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
for id RAA17596; Mon, 2 Dec 1996 17:37:00 -0800
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 17:37:00 -0800
Message-Id:
Errors-To: madole@ella.mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu