Re: [MMM] Re: The Theory-Practice Split

>> But a split between theory and
>> practical creativity doesn't strike me as so innocent - especially
>> because it suggests that the tuning list is subject to the same
>> forces that operate in academia and other inherently conservative
>> institutions.

I personally like the vibe on MMM. And I agree about the theory/
practice split. In fact, I agree so much that I don't even see the
point to discussing practice, really. Methods, instruments, passing
comments, sure. As I say, I like what's been happening on MMM. But
generating any amount of verbiage about artistic matters is for me
a far greater mistake than generating verbiage about theory.

Art doesn't succumb to the tools of language, in my experience.
In fact I think language is generally overused... at least, that's
one of the main themes of the Tao te Ching, of which I'm a big fan.
Theory just happens to be cut out for talk and math, and mailing
lists just happen to be ideal for talk and math.

My only gripe about MMM is the number of threads which are cross-
posted to tuning, present thread included.

-Carl

on 4/13/04 1:17 PM, Carl Lumma <ekin@lumma.org> wrote:

>>> But a split between theory and
>>> practical creativity doesn't strike me as so innocent - especially
>>> because it suggests that the tuning list is subject to the same
>>> forces that operate in academia and other inherently conservative
>>> institutions.
>
> I personally like the vibe on MMM. And I agree about the theory/
> practice split. In fact, I agree so much that I don't even see the
> point to discussing practice, really. Methods, instruments, passing
> comments, sure. As I say, I like what's been happening on MMM. But
> generating any amount of verbiage about artistic matters is for me
> a far greater mistake than generating verbiage about theory.
>
> Art doesn't succumb to the tools of language, in my experience.

The use of language is also art, or potentially so. In practice I think it
is more or less so, depending on the moment and the context. There have
been some artful messages now and then. Perhaps they are more the
exception. However people do express things about there passions here, and
I think that is great.

One of the things we are talking about is how to *engage* everyone more
actively. Discussions could be more "juicy", full of things of life, to the
degree that people are willing to do that. I don't imagine people leaving
out of disinterest in such a context. It is just generally true that people
are attracted to stuff that has "real meat" to it.

> In fact I think language is generally overused... at least, that's
> one of the main themes of the Tao te Ching, of which I'm a big fan.

A good example of an extensive tome of language itself.

-Kurt

>> Art doesn't succumb to the tools of language, in my experience.
>
>The use of language is also art, or potentially so.

Clearly, but prose is not the purpose in these lists.

>> In fact I think language is generally overused... at least, that's
>> one of the main themes of the Tao te Ching, of which I'm a big fan.
>
>A good example of an extensive tome of language itself.

Actually it's quite brief. But it does discuss this irony.

-Carl