From david turgeon Sent Mon, May 10th 1999, 16:08
> Well, his ideas aren't really fresh. it seem to me that they're garbled > appropriations and quotes from a variety of much smarter people, and > that they're just rehashing the same themes of authorship, etc that > theorists and philosophers have been dealing with for years. One listen > to his new album bears me out, as he mumbles about "making music with > fragments of memory" and has some idiotic authorship debate with another > dj. he's well-read, and that's all one can say for his ideas--they > bastardize the best. i don't know; i tend to think that bastardization is what really contributes to solidity (of the ideas, or species, or whatnot--think of all the inbred dogs born with countless genetic defects which would have been more easily avoided through cross-breeding) & as such, wouldn't necessarily shrug it off as an evil. obviously we're talking of ideas, not dogs, but you're the one who said the word bastardize. :) that said, his writings did seem obscure at best, incomprehensible at worse. but the mere intellectual stance i thought was welcome in my book; perhaps it contributed to an acceptation of intellectualization in otherwise-unintellectualized musical areas? or perhaps i use variations of the word intellectual way too liberally in this paragraph. as for making music with fragments of memory--some look for the groove; some do it searching for the underlying mathematical equation; some look into music as a spiritual outlet; some see it as a catharsis; some see it as pure research; some make music with fragments of memory. whatever rocks your boat, i guess is good. it's not like you'd be doing any harm, so essentially isn't it merely a matter of whether others will like it or not? & that is another story altogether anyway. :) -- david turgeon at http://www.notype.com