From Tomas Jirku Sent Fri, Aug 6th 1999, 18:36
From Tomas Jirku Sent Fri, Aug 6th 1999, 18:36
what i was saying in my initial post is that you have to be careful how you approach a topic like art history. linking art movements is not as simple as it seems because, in retrospect, we are very selective in what we feel is relevant. don't believe everything you are taught in school becuase there is alot more to an individual's influences than a reaction to previous movements. you begin to wonder why "old masters" of the modern era were misunderstood in their time yet we highly revere them now as geniuses. you can't remove them from the context of what surrounded them in their time. this applies to modern music as well but becuase of its link to popular culture, what we refer to as the equivalent to old artistic masters are just bands that were immensely popular in the past. am i out of my gourd with this one folks? are there bands that were misunderstood in their own time but incredibly popular now? anyway, as far as musical evolution is concerned, i'm sure we can all see it's complextiy in the creation of IDM. it's much more that just a reaction to happy hardcore or somthing. as far as your language is concerned, not having a firm grasp of what you're saying (be it slang or latin) can only weaken your ideas. faux maturity is not cool. tomas ChairCrusher wrote: > When someone starts attacking your language instead of what you're > saying, you know they're just fucking with you and don't have > anything valid to say. > > I'm more than willing to learn from you if you have something useful > to say, but your rebuttal of my original post was even more vague > and general than my post, and the tone of it disagreed with me. Maybe