Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!snorkelwacker!mit-eddie!joplin.mpr.ca!hui@joplin.mpr.ca
From: hui@joplin.mpr.ca (Michael Hui)
Newsgroups: rec.music.gaffa
Subject: Re: Does Kate Bush read news?
Message-ID: <2002@eric.mpr.ca>
Date: 6 Jan 90 08:29:11 GMT
References: <21208@unix.cis.pitt.edu>
Sender: news@eric.mpr.ca
Reply-To: hui@joplin.mpr.ca
Distribution: na
Organization: MIT
Lines: 29
Approved: nessus@eddie.mit.edu


In article <23019@ut-emx.UUCP> walt.cc.utexas.edu!amadeus@cs.utexas.edu
(Susan Harwood) writes:
>The sarcastic tone I took about your relative's work was not due to
>any action on her part but arose from your exclusive attitude about
>music-- which by the way had little to do with the question at hand.
>It's attitudes like that that make "serious" music inaccessible, not
>the music itself.  

Your last sentence struck me as especially true, and may explain why I
have always had difficulty reconciling "composition students'" opinions
about pop music and fans' opinions about pop music.

Yes, the attitude does matter. It certainly does matter a whole lot.

But why did you say my attitude was exclusive? Allow me to restate my
point, for the last time:

There is a lot of other exciting music going on out there. I do find
some of them to be more substantial, more interesting, and more
emotionally intense than stuff written by Kate Bush. Where Kate stands
in my own "scale" is a moot point. I simply do not put Kate miles
above everyone else simply because I do not see evidence to justify it.

But just to put things into perspective, I do have a complete collection
of Kate's work. My entire album/CD/cassette collection is around 200. So
that's not too bad as far as percentage goes?

Can we calm down now?