Harry Partch on Radio and TV

Paul Erlich:
>Are you sure that the message in which Kraig suggested you were a >"follower" of Partch was on
>this list? I didn't see it. Maybe one of the other lists?

Paul,
This list: msg 25477 of Fri Jun 22, 200, particularily line no. 25.

George Zelenz:
>Saunders,
>what list had a post from (? i can't remember) that inferred you were >probably a eunich?
>I seriously doubt your a eunich. But if you are, thats O.K. This list loves >everybody.

Zelnez,
I may or may not be a eunich, but you won't find that out so easily.

Jon Szanto:
>Michael, if you *do* happen to read this one, your reply did bring up
>an interesting thing about badly done amateur pieces, and you later
>clarified that you referred to inferior 'corporeal' musics keeping
>your focus on the abstract. One would also hope that the badly done
>attempts won't forever take you away from an interest in non-abstract
>music, but the main point is that any era will have it's share of
>ineptitudes and charlatans. And my guess is that bad corporeal
>performances would at least be easier to find a laugh at than a bad
>abstract concert! <g>

Jon,
Yeah---now that's interesting. It's a question of emphasis---Partch, I'm
pretty sure, didn't think the abstract was _bad_, just overemphasized
and badly done in his time. I have the same sort of attitude, I think,
only I believe the tables have turned and corporeal music is now more
common. This has a lot to do with a grounding in computer music,
where a great deal of reverence is paid to musicians' gestures (and hence,
to flashy real-time hardware)---I'm quite skeptical about that and though I
think making musical gestures is fun, I don't think they're something
too sacred to be automated (or too difficult). Also, being concerned with
composition algorithms, I'm really fond of people being conscious of how
their compositional process works. I'm not too impressed with the very
common method of doodling undirectedly and keeping the good bits
(neither the concept of that method or with its results, usually).
Anyway, that's just my opinion.

>It would be interesting to hear your particular musical path some
>day...

I've been meaning to upload some things somewhere---maybe
mp3.com---do you know if that's free? If you are interested,
you can read about it here:
http://members.fortunecity.com/odradek5/pp/lamps.html
http://members.fortunecity.com/odradek5/pp/rustyprogress.html
http://members.fortunecity.com/odradek5/pp/csound/index.html
and you can hear some sounds (but they're not music!) here:
http://briefcase.yahoo.com/odradek5

>John F. Sprague:
>The media does this to everything of any complexity, partly because they >haven't the time to understand what they are talking about and partly >because they don't think their audience could understand anything >complicated even if they could explain it in simple terms.

John,
Yes! It's so frustrating! But I think the attitude is something more like this:
Someone has discovered or invented something amazing, like life on Mars
or a new kind of music, and the TV producer panics and thinks, "How can
I make this exciting?".

Kraig Grady:
>Michael!
> Once again sorry you took it this way. You started off talking about >the "rare " airing of
>Partch's Dreamer and such, and i happen to remember when they aired it >quite frequently. I could
>not help and reflect on how his ideas over these years (you should see that >i was reminiscencing
>with you ) are suppressed by reducing him to nothing but a "celebrity".

I'm sorry Kraig, I just didn't see what it had to do with me or my post.
Yes, I see what you mean now. Maybe though, people who are genuine
disciples are a bit hypersensitive to this, compared with the general
musical public. I suppose anyone's followers, Wagner's for example,
often have cause to lament their man being misunderstood. Maybe it's
all part of a natural process of assimilation into the cannon. Anyway, I
hope Partch's ideas end up informing a lot more mainstream music.
The event I mentioned, btw, wasn't exactly an airing, it was an evening at
a great musical venue called club lower links. It was a magical scene, with
all the local luminaries present---Hal Rammel, Hal Russel, Jim O'Rourke,
John Corbet, etc, etc.---one of those nights where you know half the
audience from their own records. You should have been there---minds
were expanded!

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

--- In tuning@y..., "Michael Saunders" <michaelsaunders7@h...> wrote:
>
> Paul Erlich:
> >Are you sure that the message in which Kraig suggested you were a
> >"follower" of Partch was on
> >this list? I didn't see it. Maybe one of the other lists?
>
> Paul,
> This list: msg 25477 of Fri Jun 22, 200, particularily line no. 25.

No offense, Michael, but how on earth do you read this message as
Kraig suggesting that _you_ are a "follower" of Partch???