From: gadfly@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (Gadfly)
Subject: Re: John Cage is Dead
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:14:11 GMT
Summary: O tempora!  O mores!

In article <1992Aug27.194840.13359@fid.morgan.com>, steve@fid.morgan.com
(Steve Apter) writes:
> With deference to Margaret's sensibilities, it's probably time to shift
> this discussion into e-mail.  So this will be my final post on this
> noisome subject.  (Please, no applause)

Oh boy--a test ban treaty!  I'll sign too.
 
> >  			It is Yoder who is doing the foaming,
> >what with his "objective" definitions which are as impeachable as
> >they are ludicrous. 
> 
> Ludicrous?  In what way?  Crudely argued, perhaps; philosophically 
> naive, certainly.

Those sound like good candidates for "ludicrous" to me.

>                   Apart from some tactless rhetoric regarding Cage's
> death, I've never heard Brian raise his voice or call names.  Either
> your memory is playing pranks, or you're simply sucking up to the mob.

Now there's *your* selective memory kicking up again.  He accused
Roger of all manner of elitism, snobbery, etc.  Remember the "Princeton"
biz?  Whether he raised his voice while typing, though, I can't say.
Suck up to the mob?  Moi???  Hey, I *detest* Cage's music.

> >			Yoder's detractors have simply been pointing
> >that out, and quite civilly too, given Yoder's exuberant hyperbole.
 
> You should check your mailer.  I don't think it's behaving properly.

I saw Roger taking a lot of umbrage at Yoder's analogies between
Cage and famous megalomaniacs, but otherwise a lot of patience.

> >Ah, but there's the rhetorical basis of music.
 
> Sorry, I don't understand this at all.

Figures.  It was just to add a little levity with an early music
analogy.  (You know, sucking up to Roger;-)

> >Anyway, if Cardew were making his accusations *on the net*, he
> >probably would be attracting a fair amount of discussion.  But
> >lacking the ability to interact with him, one might as well laugh
> >it off.

> Laughing off the dead.  Now that's a comforting thought.  Has
> the gadfly not read his Shakespeare?

See, you're no fun at all.  Actually, I think Mr. Smoliar has
covered this much better than I could.  Although I might also have
raised the point that if you are going to judge a composer by his
philosophy, is that much different than, oh, judging a scientist
by his religion?  But this being the final word, I won't do that.
 
> >	As one would laugh Yoder off, except for his login.
 
> Oh, you mean it was his *login* that triggered all this.  I see.

I'm merely giving him the benefit of the doubt.  And after all,
all we've seen are the figments of Yoder's computer.  We have no
direct evidence that those postings are his personal thoughts.
Perhaps it has run amok and taken him hostage.

> >Now, about the "crimes" of this "evil" Cardew person.  My God, man,
> >he merely championed Mao's philosophy--he never killed anyone!
 
> Merely?  Have you learned nothing about the bureaucratization of
> evil from the events of this century?

You bet--I've learned that people will go to inordinate lengths
to avoid taking personal responsibility for their actions.  But
that responsibility is, nevertheless, theirs--and *only* theirs.
 
> >If you, say, supported George Bush 4 years ago, or today, or even
> >voted for him, does that make *you* responsible for, oh, the 100,000+
> >Iraqi civilians killed by the bombs or starved to death in the
> >continuing aftermath of his sycophantic support of the Saudis?
 
> Yes.  That is what "voting" and "responsibility" mean in a political
> context.  It's not a game.

But Iraq wasn't part of the package in 1988.  And Bush asked nobody's
permission for his actions--nor did he need them.  Where is *his*
culpability in all of this?  I fear that we have quite differing
notions on what constitutes an ethical system, not to mention ethical
behavior.  But that discussion belongs in another newsgroup.

> Gadfly-specks, and not nearly audacious enough.

Yeah, but I'm not nearly as smart as you, Mr. Apter.  I understand
your concern, however:  Since it was your posting which prompted my
reply, you must feel that you bear some responsibility for its failure.

               *** ***
Ken Perlow   ***** *****
28 Aug 92   ****** ******   11 Fructidor An CC
            *****   *****   gadfly@ihlpa.ATT.COM
             ** ** ** **
...L'AUDACE!   *** ***   TOUJOURS DE L'AUDACE!  ENCORE DE L'AUDACE!