From: brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder)
Subject: Re: John Cage is Dead
Summary: The Destruction of Music 
Organization: Quake Public Access
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 22:05:40 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.060119.26503@Princeton.EDU> roger@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig) writes:

>Of course, you've never demonstrated -- despite repeated requests -- that
>Cage ever "destroyed" *any* music, good or bad.  Your claim is as
>preposterous now as it was the first time you made it.

I have demonstrated it again and again, you just refuse to acknowledge 
my arguments.

Look, if a bunch of sadists went around calling themselves "doctors" and
as "treatment" amputated healthy limbs and poisoned patients, all the
while insisting that their kind of "medicine" was no different than the
kind that was in vogue a few years before, you could say that they were
doing more than just attacking the patients with "bad medicine".  They
would be damaging the practice of medicine in general by defining it
out of existence, and in essence accusing the traditional doctors of being
no better than butchers. 

Where we differ is that you wouldn't accept this analogy on the grounds 
(ultimately) medicine and music (in fact art in general) has no sort
of goal or purpose and therefore cannot be said to be good or bad in the
way that it can be said of medicine.  That is a philosophical disagreement,
not a lack of argument on my part.

>Not that you know anything about John Cage; as far as I know, you can
>only name two pieces by him, 

Actually, I named a half dozen of them for you, and briefly described them.

>and have made numerous incorrect statements
>about both.  

I never claimed to be an expert on Cage.  I hate his "music" and as you 
might expect don't spend a lot of time listening to to, but that doesn't
mean that what I have said about him is false.  One need not be an
automotive engineer to tell that a car that runs is better than one that
does not.

>Nor do you know anything about his admirers; who, pray
>tell, has "fawned at his feet"?  

Well, YOU for one.  Are you saying that he has no admirers?

>But now you have gone even further in exposing your nature: you've told
>us you're actually happy the man is dead.  

On a certain level, I am.  In much the same way I am happy to see a liar
or criminal die.  Of course, I would be happier to see such people reform
themselves, but what can I say?  I think he was a bad guy who caused a lot
of damage to the musical world.

>For someone who has accused
>others of ad hominem argument, you have just made the ultimate one, and
>the most disgusting one.  

My comment was not an argument, it was merely an expression of my emotional
state.  I didn't say "His 'music' is bad because he's a weenie.", I said that
because he had such a bad effect on the world, I am happy to see him gone.
That's not an ad hominem argument...

>You are a pathetic, sniveling jerk, a coward

...I'd say that THIS is more of an ad hominem argument, though.  See the
difference?

>who hasn't the guts to respond to queries that would demonstrate his
>ignorance, 

I have responded repeatedly.  You just have not been willing to accept 
my answers.  That's YOUR problem, not mine.

>a toad who rejoices in the death of peaceful human beings he
>thought he disagreed with, while knowing nothing about the people he so
>twistedly hates.

So, you think I know nothing about Cage?  Gimme a break.

You think that 4'33" is "good" or "music" and call ME twisted?  Come on.

--Brian