Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site mhuxt.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!rbm
From: rbm@mhuxt.UUCP (marcus)
Newsgroups: net.music,net.music.classical
Subject: Re: Progress, the Arts, Razor Blades and Bull
Message-ID: <631@mhuxt.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 1-Mar-85 13:11:51 EST
Article-I.D.: mhuxt.631
Posted: Fri Mar  1 13:11:51 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Mar-85 04:38:20 EST
References: <8347@brl-tgr.ARPA>, <109@spar.UUCP> <963@hound.UUCP> <3096@allegra.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 20
Xref: watmath net.music:6313 net.music.classical:937

> <progress: eating the good stuff and leaving the bull>
"Progress" is different from"change" in that "progress" implies change 
toward a goal. "Progress" in medicine, most people would agree, would be a
change in medical knowledge or in the application of medical knowledge that
would lead toward cures. Progress in semiconductor technology can be
considered to be the evolution ("change") toward smaller dimensions,
greater memory storage capacity, etc. "Progress" can be measured.

Although there are changes in techniques of art that occur continuously
(atonality in music, minimalism in music as well as in the graphic arts, etc),
I believe that most people's definition of "art" includes some idea of
aesthetic sense as a main point, and excludes ideas of how this aesthetic
value can be best achieved. (No, I don't think that the Mona Lisa is
better art than a cave man's drawing because oils are "better" than
charcoal or vegatable dyes; rather because Da Vince was a better artist!).

As mentioned above, progress can always be measured. At any time during
progression toward a goal, it should be possible to point an arrow in the 
direction toward which further change constitutes "progress". I defy
anyone to define such an arrow, now, for any of the arts!