From: norbeck@mira.bucknell.edu (nancy norbeck `93)
Newsgroups: rec.music.misc
Subject: Re: he can't dance/he can't sing
Date: 9 Apr 92 03:48:21 GMT
Organization: Bucknell University, Lewisburg, Pa.

In article <1992Apr08.172104.11015@crash.cts.com> jester@crash.cts.com
(Ken Bibb) writes:



>5) You completely miss the point:  Phil wants Fame and Fortune to
>   the exclusion of Quality.  Why?  Because more people will by pop
>   crap like "We Can't Dance" and his solo stuff than will buy
>   "Foxtrot" or "Selling England by the Pound".  Where do I say that
>   he wants Fame and Fortune to the exclusion of anything else but
>   quality?

Ok, so where do you say where you got this information?  You asked in
your post (which I deleted most of) for verification from a respected
journal or magazine as far as other facts go, where are your
references?  Did Phil just walk up to you one day and tell you that he
wanted F&F for those reasons above?  Did he even mention F&F?  I'd
like proof of your telepathic abilities please, or at least Phil's
autograph and a videorecording of the conversation you had with him in
which you learned this information, if you can't provide proper
written sources, such as "respected journals or magazines."

And just who are you to go saying that you are the Determiner of
Quality?  Does every artist you listen to have to meet your specific
quality control guidelines?  Reality time here, GENESIS is the band in
question here.  Unless I'm mistaken, your name does not appear on the
credits listing you as a member of the band.  Or a writer for them.
Or an agent for them.  Or a producer, or any other affiliate of
Genesis.  Who are you to judge?  Beyond your own personal decision of
whether or not to buy the album, you're not in that position.

Let's get something straight here.  Genesis is a band.  They make
music.  Music, as many people seem to have forgotten, is an art, much
like writing a book or sculpting a statue.  The artist controls what
goes into his or her particular work, and has his or her own reasons
for doing so.  Whatever those reasons may be, they are valid for that
particular person, and no one other than the artist has the right to
change them.  *Granted,* there will be as many different
interpretations of that work as there are people who hear it, read it,
or see it.  But those interpretations, whether they're the ones the
artist had in mind or not, are personal, and shouldn't be forced onto
an audience either.

Please stop plying high-and-mighty seer of all things and quit trying
to tell us you can read Phil's mind, or anybody else's for that
matter.  This group doesn't exist to bash an artist.  It also doesn't
exist to bash the legitimate opinions held by others.  If I happen to
like the new album, who are you to tell me I shouldn't, or am not
allowed?

Finally, when it comes down to music, it's pretty basic.  You have the
right to like what you want, and not like other things.  But before
you go knocking someone else's songwriting (or performing) ability 
(or writing, or sculpting) ask yourself this:  Can I write better
stuff than so-and-so can?  If you can, then quit complaining and go do
it!  If you can't, then respect the artist in question for his or her
ability, whether you like it or not, and allow those people who enjoy
it the opportunity to do so in spite of your own opinion.  You know,
kinda like "Let he who is perfect cast the first stone."

Can we stop this senseless bickering now?

>jester@crash.cts.com


Nancy Norbeck

--
	"You'd think they'd dust this [food] before they serve it."
			--Hawkeye Pierce
		  "And remove all the flavor?"
			--Father Mulcahey
Xref: sparky rec.music.misc:14029 alt.music.alternative:3101