Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!think!mit-eddie!nessus
From: nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan)
Newsgroups: net.music
Subject: Re: the cutting edge of rock music
Message-ID: <75@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 13-Oct-85 03:27:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.75
Posted: Sun Oct 13 03:27:08 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 15-Oct-85 05:41:28 EDT
References: <605@tellab1.UUCP> <25@mit-eddie.UUCP> <629@tellab1.UUCP>
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 53

> From: barth@tellab1.UUCP (Barth Richards)

> I could have listed many more artists that I happen to like (some of
> which you just mentioned) but I tried to think of artists that were
> undisputable "out on the edge".

Well, there are lots of people who I like too, who I don't necessarily
think are on the cutting edge.  But I don't think you have to be flipped
out avante-guarde to be on the cutting edge.  In fact, I feel a lot of
"avante-guarde" music isn't on the cutting edge, just because it falls
*so* neatly into the class "avant-guarde".

> Peter Gabriel is excellent but largely accessible (although being
> experimental and accessible at the same time may be qualification for
> the list in itself!)

People like Peter Gabriel and Kate Bush, I feel are definitely on the
cutting edge.  (In fact, the most important cutting edge.)  They may not
always fall neatly into the class "avante-guarde", but they are
definitely powerful innovators, and are cutting new paths in music
rather than just perfecting old ones.  They may tend to use a lot of
knowledge that already exists about music, rather than just throwing
away the book, like a lot of avant-guarde musicians do, but that's
probably an even better approach.  It means I can relate to it (because
how music is perceived is largely a cultural phenomenon), rather than
just saying, "Hmmmm, that's interesting".  Distortion of what you
already know is much more powerful emotionally than things totally new.
Just ask any surrealist.

> others have done what the Art Bears did, both before and after.(After
> all, the Art Bears was largely a continuation of Henry Cow.)

Who?  The Art Bears don't sound like Henry Cow to me (even though they
have a couple of the same people).

> Mission of Bhurma was excellent (they have broken up, haven't they?),
> but didn't necissarily cut any new trails.

Yes they did.  Yes they did.

> (Well, maybe a few.) Nash The Slash is definately avant-garde, but
> maybe not on the absolute cutting edge.

Well, what's the "absolute" cutting edge?  And is that the best place to
be?  I feel that even Roy Harper is subtlely on the cutting edge, and he
does something you might call "folk rock", but he's always doing stuff
that's very different from others.

			"And if you're coming -- jump
			 'coz we're leaving with the Big Sky"

			 Doug Alan
			  nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (or ARPA)