Subject: Re: more observances
From: Naut Humon (email@example.com)
Date: Sun Jul 18 1999 - 14:54:23 EDT
>Kevin Austin observed of my "more observances" post below -
>>The music should speak for itself as a first impression >regardless of
>>source ("it ain't where you're from - its >where you're at!") -- then we
>>investigate further the >ideas and theories if compelled to do so.
>This, IMV, is a rather limited understanding of how the human mind is
>structured. I take from the statement that "as a first impression"
>negates the importance of learning and exposure to stimulus for the
>evaluation of these stimulii. The concept of "should speak for itself"
>suggests an external universal order -- from my reading, the exact
>opposite of the argument that you wished to make previously.
>In a nutshell: is there a 'natural order', which allows things to 'speak
>for themselves', or are these orders created, and therefore have to be
>learned? (Ooooooopppsss -- there's that 'academic' thingey poking up it
>head again ... )
- my "impressionistic" statement above refers to primarily to
the music jury experience of never having enough time to
really judge entries properly and having to go by the awkward
method of way too quickly trying to evaluate far too many
submissions and still be fair or objective. Indeed a flawed
system but given the attention parameters of competition
situations like this should we view the works more
anonymously at first look or give special attention because
we know WHO the entries are from or the concepts behind
................until later ................ naut humon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 13:09:02 EDT