Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Warren Burt review cancelled

Warren is a sweetheart
and while yes some if his music is pure algo-konstruct
i think he realises the methods it nice ways
very simlar to the mastermind that is Lawrence Ball

Pat Pagano, Director
South East Just Intonation Society
http://indians.australians.com/meherbaba/
http://www.screwmusicforever.com/SHREESWIFT/
----- Original Message -----
From: <jpehrson@rcn.com>
To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 10:55 PM
Subject: [tuning] Warren Burt review cancelled

> Well, the good news is that I managed to have that somewhat
> uncomplimentary review I did about Warren Burt cancelled before the
> publication put it out. I am not a great fan of certain kinds of
> algorithmic composition and felt I *had* to write the review since I
> got a "press comp" at Engine 27 here in NYC. However, all this
> trouble is compounded by the fact that I notice Warren Burt will be
> speaking at the Microfest where I will also have some music done in
> April. This is all very "bad karma..." and I actually had a very
> pleasant conversation with Burt when I met him, and I would like to
> keep up good relations. So the review will NOT appear in print! I'm
> glad the publication was so far behind schedule so I could catch it!
> The only version of the review in public existence was here as a
> draft on the Tuning List.
>
> Speaking of which, is everyone aware that Google now searches news
> groups like rec.music.compose as well as the Tuning List??
>
> Try a search on your own name, and you will probably come up with
> some Tuning List posts. We have managed to immortalize some
> wonderful foolishness!
>
> ______ ___ __ -- - - _______ -
> Joseph Pehrson
>
>
>
>
> You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
> email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
> tuning-subscribe@egroups.com - join the tuning group.
> tuning-unsubscribe@egroups.com - unsubscribe from the tuning group.
> tuning-nomail@egroups.com - put your email message delivery on hold for
the tuning group.
> tuning-digest@egroups.com - change your subscription to daily digest
mode.
> tuning-normal@egroups.com - change your subscription to individual
emails.
>
>
>

🔗Pedro Montaigne <xjscott@earthlink.net>

Joseph,

> Well, the good news is that I managed to have that somewhat
> uncomplimentary review I did about Warren Burt cancelled before
> the publication put it out.

Interesting. My dad used to write true-life articles
for sailing magazines. Here are two reviews of his work
(hang in there friends, I _am_ going to tie this back
to tuning, and you're going to love it):
----------------------------------------------------
Dear OFFSHORE,

I suppose arrogance insensitivity and stupidity
are their own reward, in which case Jason Scott's
cup must be running over. I have diligently
followed all three of this stories, searching for
more than the glimmer of sanity or common sense
and have found little. His macho attitude leaves
little room for any compassion for his real
troubles. By the time he was done swaggering
through a foreign country, abusing its customs,
attitudes and advice I could only cheer for his
difficulties, and sorely wished the pirates had
got him.

Sincerely,
Sarah E. Amyes

DEAR OFFSHORE:

A friend visiting your State brought me the May
issue of your rag, and I read the article about
"piracy" in Baja California, Mexico, with such
disgust and hurt that I am barely able to write
this: I would much prefer to deliver my comments
to you and the writer in person, with physical
emphasis.

You have not only lied about piracy in Mexico,
which does not happen at all, but you have
maligned the people of Baja California, including
all of the villagers and humble fishermen who
regularly welcome and aid visiting boaters. As I
write this, l am thinking about the many incidents
I have seen and experienced while cruising these
waters; not only are boaters absolutely safe from
harm from these gentle people, but they are always
ready to lend a hand in protection from hazards.

I have cruised the area, and camped in Baja over
many years. There is no place in the U.S. which is
safer.

If this article is a sample of the accuracy of
articles in your magazine, I hope you soon go
bankrupt.

Walter Colby
Baja Califonia, Mexico

Dear OFFSHORE,

A few words about Jason Scott: He battles savage
pirates. He wheels and deals with the inscrutable
Chinese. He endures lazy foreign crew members. He
alienates his wife. He annoys the hell out of me.
Have we heard the last of this pompous, racist
braggart? Maybe you should run his articles under
"Adventures in Boating Stupidity." The only good
that I can see in his "adventures" is that they
keep him far away from New England. If the "John
Wayne" of boating ever sails the "Rebel Yell" in
this direction, let me know far in advance so can
head for some safer harbor, like Nicaragua.

P. Bodine
Medford, MA
----------------------------------------------------

OK, me again -- now, each time a letter like this came
in, the editors would pass them along to my Dad with
a note that said "Keep up the good work, Jas!" or
"Jas -- Everytime we put your name on the cover,
our newsstand sales go through the frigin roof!" or
"Jas, You've got the Midas Touch!"

Now what do we know?

1. There is no such thing as bad publicity.
2. The worst review is no review.

OK. Allegedly, The Rite of Spring provoked fistfights in the
audience among people who disagreed on whether it was really
art or was in fact an unbearable collection of candomly
assembled screechy noises. Who cares if that Stravinsky
story is true or not, the fact is that his music inspired
great passion in people. Which is the very best thing
you can do as an artist -- wake people up and turn them
into real human beings. What I wouldn't give for the
old days when the U.S Congressional Record described
the rampaging fist-fights and free-for-alls that broke
out among regularly among Senators and Representatives
who really cared about the issues! Back then the word
'Honorable' really meant something.

Now if Joseph hated Warren's music and everything it
represents and felt so passionately about it that he was
willing to write a scathing treatise seething with venom and
vitriol then that us the ABSOLUTELY BEST compliment he could
pay. And a _real_ indicator of the quality, provocativeness
and impact of Warren's work. What has Warren stirred up?
Questions about the nature of art! Can a machine produce
art? Is art threatened? Are algorithms meaningless? Is the
creation of an algorithm an artistic event? Should we build
robotic tanks and planes and send them into battle to kill
people without involving a human decision in the loop? That
is what we're really talking about!! Yes! An idiot genius
friend of mine was working on this stupid Terminator cr_p at
a military contractor he worked for. "Isn't this neat," he
told me, "my design automatically guides the plane in and
targets the weapons array. All the pilot has to do is
confirm the launch! Cool huh?" "Look Travis you d-ckh-ad,
what the h-ll is wrong with you? Have you lost your mind you
demon? Do you think they are going to bother with a pilot?"
"They would never do that!" "How can you be so smart and so
d-mn naive? How many lines of code do they have to comment
out in order to leave the pilot out of the loop?" "Um, one."
"And did they tell you to be sure to identify that line?"
"Uh, actually my boss did bring that up." "And what does
that suggest to you?" "But they would never do that! That
would be morally wrong. These weapons are strictly
defensive! They would never do that." "Travis my buddy, a
corporation has no conscience, according to Thoreau who was
right and you know it. And the government is the largest
corporation in the world. Every day limits on its power are
removed. It's nothing personal. It's not a conspiracy. It's
just how power works. Please wake up." "But they would never
do that!"

OK - see? This is 100% true (BTW, 6 years after that
conversation was last week when I read in the Wall Street
Journal that the new administration is going to go full
throttle on pilotless weapons that make targeting decisions
autonomously -- THIS IS WHERE ALGORITHMS HAVE BROUGHT US! So
yes I agree with Joseph 100% -- Machines are terrifying
things capable of great evil, when 'properly designed.'

People nowadays have a real reason to be threatened
by progress:

"Why, just yesterday I heard that there is
going to be a concert of some newfangled tuning system!"

"Well I say what's wrong with the tunings we got? I heard
that music and it is from the devil!"

"You're right! It's communists and liberals that are doing
that garbage and they're paying for it with _our_ tax
dollars!"

Hey you know what, I sympathize with these characters!
Where is technology leading us? And why is _it_ leading
_us_ instead of the reverse ways?

These are real issues regular, intelligent, reasonable
people are dealing with in the real world.

One possible expression of that is to write a scathing
review. And expression is art.

Scathing reviews are the best kind. People love them.
Can relate to them. It whets their appetite. Excites,
invigorates them. Arouses their curiosity. Provokes them.
Inspires debate among their friends, supplying them with
ready-made _arguments_ to agree with or tear apart.
When the rabbinical spirit of friendly debate is awakened,
we all win!

(Now, ad hominem arguments are puerile and should be
avoided among ourselves of course, but that's not
what we're talking about. We're talking about real
issues here.)

So, I say let's realize this and enter into a mutual
awareness -- a secret compact. When we hear that a fellow
microtonalist is coming to town or we've just gotten done
with hearing a concert, let's go with the flow of what we
experience. If we absolutely hated it (and certainly we can
agree that there is lots to hate and lots to love about any
kind of music), we should come to terms with that experience
and tell everyone who will listen everything we hated about
it! Write scathing letters to the editor of every newspaper,
newsletter, magazine, journal and TV show with any sort of
relevance. Explain in great detail and with elegant and
beautiful vitriol our _real_ feelings. Hold nothing back.
Hey, go ahead and throw in those ad hominem arguments.
Question the composer's lifestyle choices and connect it
through innuendo to his poor compositional talent. In no
time at all, the concert halls will be packed with
fist-fighting music haters and 21st century music will have
caught fire, burning down everything in it's path,
terrifying, inspiring, awakening the doleful slumber of the
quiet desperation that guides the lives of our culture, our
people, our country. Music, having lain dead for centuries,
will enter a golden age of expression and beauty.
Interconnect everything! Let the glass bead game begin!

> I actually had a very pleasant conversation with Burt when I met
> him, and I would like to keep up good relations.

I've only met Warren once -- at the first concert he gave
upon returning from Australia (at the Sonic Arts Gallery --
Monz, say hi to Jonathan & Elizabeth for me) and he is a
really nice guy who is very excited about what he does.
I too have reservations about algorithmic composition
usually but must admit I liked what I heard. Real talent and
creativity can express itself in any system -- including
the fabrication of algorithms and systems. Warren doesn't
seem like the kind of guy to get offended by much, in
my limited and brief exposure to him.

> Speaking of which, is everyone aware that Google now searches news
> groups like rec.music.compose as well as the Tuning List??

Merde! This is NOT NOT NOT good. I do not like it one bit.
Seriously, let's ask Yahoo if we can AVOID that by making
the list private and then accepting one and all anyway.

> Try a search on your own name, and you will probably come up with
> some Tuning List posts.

Well that's easy enough to get around now that we
know, but still -- it may be too late for me already.

- Pedro
(z h e p h)

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

--- In tuning@y..., "Pedro Montaigne" <xjscott@e...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_18865.html#18873

> Now what do we know?
>
> 1. There is no such thing as bad publicity.
> 2. The worst review is no review.
>

I want to thank you, Pedro, for your commentary, and there is much of
great interest in it. In fact, we have tried some of your more
"extreme" ideas on this very list. However, rather than creating
exciting commentary, people have gotten very upset and have taken
everything personally. In fact, Paul Erlich (hi Paul!) is one person
enamored of a rather strong debating technique and, frankly, it
doesn't bother me and some others... but there are STILL other people
here who take everything personally and it frequently results in
Paul having to make "embarassing" and somewhat unnecessary
retractions. (At least that's how *I* read it.)

> Now if Joseph hated Warren's music and everything it
> represents and felt so passionately about it that he was
> willing to write a scathing treatise seething with venom and
> vitriol then that us the ABSOLUTELY BEST compliment he could
> pay.

Unfortunately, it didn't get me quite so "stirred up." In fact, it
didn't get me "stirred up" at all, which was the crux of the
problem... (Hi Warren!!)

And a _real_ indicator of the quality, provocativeness
> and impact of Warren's work. What has Warren stirred up?
> Questions about the nature of art! Can a machine produce
> art? Is art threatened? Are algorithms meaningless? Is the
> creation of an algorithm an artistic event? Should we build
> robotic tanks and planes and send them into battle to kill
> people without involving a human decision in the loop?

But I already thought we had such a "robot" in the White House?...
(sorry... back OT) And for our "ultimate cowardice" where we can sit
in the comfort of our plush "living rooms" and push buttons to
destroy military targets:

>"my design automatically guides the plane in and
> targets the weapons array. All the pilot has to do is
> confirm the launch! Cool huh?"

> How many lines of code do they have to comment
> out in order to leave the pilot out of the loop?" "Um, one."

> "And did they tell you to be sure to identify that line?"
> "Uh, actually my boss did bring that up."

Pretty funny.

>>
> Hey you know what, I sympathize with these characters!
> Where is technology leading us? And why is _it_ leading
> _us_ instead of the reverse ways?
>
> These are real issues regular, intelligent, reasonable
> people are dealing with in the real world.
>
> One possible expression of that is to write a scathing
> review. And expression is art.
>
> Scathing reviews are the best kind. People love them.
> Can relate to them. It whets their appetite. Excites,
> invigorates them. Arouses their curiosity. Provokes them.
> Inspires debate among their friends, supplying them with
> ready-made _arguments_ to agree with or tear apart.
> When the rabbinical spirit of friendly debate is awakened,
> we all win!
>

Well, I admit they contribute to "intellectual progress." And this
is why some people enjoy such debate. However, as soon as the debate
turns "personal" we have a problem and not only do people end up not
learning anything, they also end up not talking to one another. As I
say, this has happened (still *IS* happening) on this very list.

At one point the New York Times had a policy that reviewers COULD NOT
be composers. I always thought it was a "funny" policy, until I had
more experience. It actually makes sense. In other words, a
reviewer should really be "out of the game" so that he can comment
with impunity in any ways he wishes.

In *my* case, since I am still actively composing and looking for
performances, I can't afford to alienate so many people, even though
it might make for good and "intellectually stimulating" copy.

That's why I have to reserve the right to drop a review or, actually,
to stop writing them altogether. Generally speaking, I do the
latter. I do very few of them nowadays and mostly of "historical"
figures if there is some musical point I wish to make.

Thanks for the comments!

_________ _____ _____ ____ _
Joseph (Algorobo) Pehrson

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

Joseph,

Just to follow up on this, as Pedro spoke at length and very
eloquently!

--- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
> but there are STILL other people
> here who take everything personally and it frequently results in
> Paul having to make "embarassing" and somewhat unnecessary
> retractions. (At least that's how *I* read it.)

The crux of the matter is how a review or criticism is presented.
I've had the opportunity to, once again, have a long dialog with Paul
*off-list* to straighten some things out, and virtually every point
is in agreement -- in subject, but not necessarily in tone!

There is, it seems to me, a great deal of difference in the informal
and interactive nature of these fora, and if the bulk of
these 'conversations' could have taken place in a bar or
coffeehouse, where facial expressions, tone of voice, and very rapid
give-and-take were present, I'll wager that 99% percent of the
problems you perceive would disappear, or at the very least be dealt
with quickly and far less rancor than is apparant on the list.

And every list has these cycles, save for (intelligently and
humanely) moderated ones.

More importantly, the generation of a review or commentary for actual
publication, be it in print or online, carries with it an entirely
different set of responsibilities. You seem to be the kind of person
who could very well write of a concert with a minimum of non-
essential histrionics. As all good journalism probably should have,
at least in this context.

If the progress in this particular realm (microtonal
composition/performance) is to continue to grow, if this community is
to *help* it grow, then it can certainly stand a healthy dose of
objective evaluation. Even if you prefaced it with "I'm not a fan of
algorhythmic composition", your bias would be clearly stated and then
you could get on with how you reacted to the music. Knowing Warren,
he would take careful and reasoned commentary with grace and
appreciation; at least, that is the impression he has given me in the
past.

The last thing that will encourage true growth is either silence or
feel-good "atta-boys". Phrased in a civil manner, couched in truth
and personal reaction, an honest review could be an invaluable tool
for evolution of the chosen art form.

I very frequently do not completely live up to these standards, and
find on this list the postings of Margo Schulter to be exemplary
examples of good, honest, caring intellectual give-and-take. Always
willing to acknowledge helpful corrections, always happy to give
credit where due, it is really a pleasure to read, in spite of the
fact that the subject matter is not something I utilize!

> At one point the New York Times had a policy that reviewers COULD
NOT
> be composers. I always thought it was a "funny" policy, until I
had
> more experience. It actually makes sense. In other words, a
> reviewer should really be "out of the game" so that he can comment
> with impunity in any ways he wishes.

And we end up with reviewers who know absolutely nothing about
entirely new territory, writing empty-headed nonsense (at times).
Sure, to see how it might affect an entirely new set of
ears/aesthetics, why not? But this shouldn't preclude knowledgeable
reviewing. Hey, if I want to know what a micro- concert was like that
I can't attend, I'd sure like to hear about it from people on this
list rather than Alex Ross of the New Yorker!

> In *my* case, since I am still actively composing and looking for
> performances, I can't afford to alienate so many people, even
though
> it might make for good and "intellectually stimulating" copy.

People with strong convictions in their art could certainly stand up
to your views. What would they think if you artificially back-patted
them and then later realized you couldn't stand their stuff?

Well, this is a small community and none of this is the end of the
world, but I myself would look forward to yours, or any of the other
list members, commentaries on concerts you might hear. NY and it's
environs have a lot of activity, and if we can't get there it is nice
to hear how it was...

Cheers,
Jon

Warren Burt review cancelled

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗shreeswifty <ppagano@bellsouth.net>

🔗Pedro Montaigne <xjscott@earthlink.net>

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com