Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!gatech!udel!princeton!phoenix!eliot
From: eliot@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Eliot Handelman)
Newsgroups: comp.music
Subject: Re: 2nd rate European Conference
Message-ID: <5164@idunno.Princeton.EDU>
Date: 10 Jan 91 06:07:35 GMT
References: <1117@artsnet.UUCP> <5141@idunno.Princeton.EDU> <1991Jan10.050843.11928@rand.org>
Sender: news@idunno.Princeton.EDU
Organization: Music, Cognitive Science Lab, Princeton (which?)
Lines: 18

In article <1991Jan10.050843.11928@rand.org> edhall@rand.org writes:
;In article <5141@idunno.Princeton.EDU> eliot@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Eliot Handelman) writes:
;-In article <1117@artsnet.UUCP> mgresham@artsnet.UUCP (Mark Gresham) writes:

;-;Big damn deal.

;-                                                        He probably
;-learned about this from Lerdahl and Jackendoff.

;Gosh, and here I thought the original complaint was that the abstract
;was condescending to pop music.  If this is so, Messrs. Gresham and
;Handelman would seem to be adding insult to injury.

;If this is so, can I do it, too?  :-)

Good grief, our man in Rand! Nothing of the sort intended: you see, only
a complete idiot would characterize the complexities of all non-classical
music as "a change in song form." That's the ironic fundamental.