ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/zorn-list/archive/v03.n622

Internet Message Format | 2001-11-19 | 21KB

From: [e-mail] (Zorn List Digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Zorn List Digest V3 #622
Reply-To: zorn-list
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


Zorn List Digest       Monday, November 19 2001       Volume 03 : Number 622



In this issue:
-
       Re: re. zorn/zionism (and some music stuff)
       Re: zorn/zionism (for Yahwe's sake!)
       Re: zorn/zionism (for Yahwe's sake!)
       Re: re. zorn/zionism (and some music stuff)
       Re: zorn/zionism (for Yahwe's sake!)
       ECM Booklets w/o disks
       Re: zorn/zionism (for Yahwe's sake!)
       Re: zorn/zionism (for Yahwe's sake!)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:02:05 -0800
From: "Patrice L. Roussel" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: re. zorn/zionism (and some music stuff)

    Mike,

On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:31:00  "Mike Chamberlain" wrote:
>
> The single opinion of Weinberg's that you quoted is about what I would
> expect to hear from a clever second-year university student after a couple
> too many beers.  If he has been invited to speak at universities on the
> subject, then presumably he has more interesting and useful things to say on
> the subject of human nature and the place of religion in people's lives.  If
> you are willing to enligten me on this rather than engage in some kind of
> who-can-be-more-sarcastic back and forth, I would be most grateful.

I strongly advised you not to read him (specially if you think that my
comments are sarcastic :-).

He is rational to a point that even in your worst nightmare you have never
approached one. His views on religion (any flavor and not just the one
practiced by the person you disagree with) are fairly bleak. His view of
the meaning of the universe is even bleaker, at least from the perspective
of finding a meaning to it with a special place for humanity.

But it you feel masochist, you might enjoy it (I warn you, it is 100% Zen
free).

    Patrice.

- -

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:25:40 +0100
From: duncan youngerman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: zorn/zionism (for Yahwe's sake!)

>
>
> >When someone says: "I'd love to hear radical islamic music", one just
> >has to pinch one's self:
> >Taliban law (and you cannot get more radically islamic than that)
> >punishes any playing of music or singing with stiff jail sentences.
> >Iranian and Saudi Arabian laws fare only slightly better.
>
> One only needs to pinch oneself if one is unaware of the various
> definitions of "radical" and how it is being used in this context.More than
> one version of radical Islam (i.e. that which departs considerably from
> traditional Islam) whould of course permit music.

1) Radical comes from the latin for root, radix. Radical Islam aims at
returning to what it imagines as the original Islam of Mohamet, not "depart
considerably from it". Anyone diverging from it is an infidel, or outlaw.
2) Music and other artistic expressions such as painting, theater, dance, and
film are banned or strongly discouraged by all existing radical Islamic
societies.
3) It's important to know what context words and expressions are used in. The
label"Radical Jewish" in 2001 is misleading to say the least- that's all I'm
saying (give peace a chance).

DY.


>
>
>
>
> -


- -

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:15:31 -0600
From: "Robert A. Pleshar" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: zorn/zionism (for Yahwe's sake!)

At 10:25 PM 11/19/01 +0100, duncan youngerman wrote:
>>
>>
>> >When someone says: "I'd love to hear radical islamic music", one just
>> >has to pinch one's self:
>> >Taliban law (and you cannot get more radically islamic than that)
>> >punishes any playing of music or singing with stiff jail sentences.
>> >Iranian and Saudi Arabian laws fare only slightly better.
>>
>> One only needs to pinch oneself if one is unaware of the various
>> definitions of "radical" and how it is being used in this context.More than
>> one version of radical Islam (i.e. that which departs considerably from
>> traditional Islam) whould of course permit music.
>
>1) Radical comes from the latin for root, radix. Radical Islam aims at
>returning to what it imagines as the original Islam of Mohamet, not "depart
>considerably from it". Anyone diverging from it is an infidel, or outlaw.
>2) Music and other artistic expressions such as painting, theater, dance, and
>film are banned or strongly discouraged by all existing radical Islamic
>societies.

Yes, Radical (rightist, for lack of a better term) Islam is as you describe
it. However, I was referring to a Radical (leftist) Islam that would depart
considerably from the norm of Islam (which is after all one of the
definitions of the word radical) IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION! Perhaps Turkey
in the 70s, especially in films, was an Islamic culture that was pretty far
left of what was and is the norm. That type of radical.

>3) It's important to know what context words and expressions are used in. The
>label"Radical Jewish" in 2001 is misleading to say the least- that's all I'm
>saying (give peace a chance).

That was my point exactly, you seemed not to understand the context that
Radical Jewish Culture is being used in here and I was obiously suggesting
I'd be interested in hearing  similar approaches to Islamic music, which do
exist. I suppose calling something radical anything can be misleading if
you don't want to bother to think about it.

When an auto manufacturer talks about a radical new approach to fuel
injection, obviously they are talking about doing something differently
than normal, not getting back to the roots of fuel injection.

There is more than one radical.

Rob


- -

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:33:42 -0600
From: Joseph Zitt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: re. zorn/zionism (and some music stuff)

On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 10:19:43AM -0800, Patrice L. Roussel wrote:

> You would have judged the opinion of an average joe on theoretical physics
> as not trustworthy, I would have understood.
>
> But is not religion something that all of us (often against our will)
> are all drowned in it (specially sickening in the US...)? Since our lives
> depend a lot on what religion (in a way not so different than with
> politics), shouldn't we all have something relevant to say about it?

We're all surrounded by physics too.

> By following your logic to the extreme (people outside a field being not
> qualified to say anything worht), you end up with obscurantism, where
> regardless of what bullshit you are saying, only the members of your church
> (in the general sense) have something relevant to say.

Um, wrong.

> This reminds me of Chomski saying that he never had any problem to discuss
> with scientific audiences, and only when addressing human science ones, he
> was questioned for not having the correct (academic) background.

Sure: the scientific audiences could judge for themselves whether what
he was saying was true. Those without the background chose to depend on
other supposed experts for validation.

This reminds me of a story I heard a while back: a historian that I
know attended a conference on the theories of a famous historian (I've
forgotten whom).. He noticed that while the theories were full of
holes when referring to his area of specialty, they seemed valid in
areas about which he knew less. Thing is, in talking to others there,
they all realized that while the theories were bogus in their areas,
each thought they described other areas well.  It was only when they
all got together that they realized than he was completely blowing
smoke in all areas, in ways that convinced those who were unfamiliar
with each area but nodded in the face of his supposed authority.

If you fall for such stuff, you'll believe in telephone psychics
because Dionne Warwick said that they were real.

Which reminds of a gag I heard when I was a kid: The time came for the
unveiling of the tomb of Israel's Unknown Soldier. After a great
ceremony, a shroud was lifted from the gravestone, where they saw
"Chaim Lifschutz 1930-1956". One guy, surprised, said. "I thought he
was the *unknown* soldier." Another replied, "As a tailor he was
known; as a soldier he was nothing much."

- --
|> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <|
| [e-mail]           http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt |
| Latest CDs: Collaborations/ All Souls  http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt |
| Comma: Voices of New Music    Silence: the John Cage Discussion List |


- -

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:09:40 -0600
From: Joseph Zitt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: zorn/zionism (for Yahwe's sake!)

On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 10:25:40PM +0100, duncan youngerman wrote:

> 1) Radical comes from the latin for root, radix. Radical Islam aims at
> returning to what it imagines as the original Islam of Mohamet, not "depart
> considerably from it". Anyone diverging from it is an infidel, or outlaw.

One can see from this that Duncan is an idiot.

This has nothing to do with intelligence or value judgement. "Idiot" comes
from the Greek "idios", meaning "own, private", hence one who has opinions
other than the norm.

As Humpty Dumpty said, "That's glory for you."
http://www.coli.uni-sb.de/~stwa/alice.htm

> 2) Music and other artistic expressions such as painting, theater, dance, and
> film are banned or strongly discouraged by all existing radical Islamic
> societies.

Only by your odd personal definition of "radical".

> 3) It's important to know what context words and expressions are used in. The
> label"Radical Jewish" in 2001 is misleading to say the least- that's all I'm
> saying (give peace a chance).

Does it mislead anyone other than, perhaps, you? That's all I'm saying
(goo goo ga joob).

- --
|> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <|
| [e-mail]           http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt |
| Latest CDs: Collaborations/ All Souls  http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt |
| Comma: Voices of New Music    Silence: the John Cage Discussion List |


- -

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 01:09:51 +0100
From: "Remco Takken" <[e-mail]>
Subject: ECM Booklets w/o disks

Hello there,
A strange mailing from me, this time. A friend of mine used to work for the
advertising department of ECM, and I got a bunch of cd booklets from him
without disks (that hurts, especially when seeing the Marion Brown 1970
re-issue withut being able to play it!).

If one of you guys happen to have promotional disks from ECM, and they came
without any booklets: I might be able to help you out.

This is what I have, ECM order number first, then number printed on actual
disk:

Back leaflets only:
1119 (531-029)
1187 (847-329)
1208 (531-025)
1260 (815-274)
1378 (847-888)
1413 (843-196)

Complete front and back leaflets:
Watt12 1/2 (823-865)
Xtrawatt/8 (531-557)
1004 (527-710)
1105 (847-323)
1109 (529-087)
1143 (529-126)
1156 (529-124)
1158 (849-078)
1573 (529-035)

Bye, Remco


- -

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 01:36:25 +0100
From: duncan youngerman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: zorn/zionism (for Yahwe's sake!)

- --------------9B1743DEC418E00745A47CC5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit



>
>
> Yes, Radical (rightist, for lack of a better term) Islam is as you describe
> it. However, I was referring to a Radical (leftist) Islam that would depart
> considerably from the norm of Islam (which is after all one of the
> definitions of the word radical) IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION! Perhaps Turkey
> in the 70s, especially in films, was an Islamic culture that was pretty far
> left of what was and is the norm. That type of radical.
>
>
>
> you seemed not to understand the context that
> Radical Jewish Culture is being used in here and I was obiously suggesting
> I'd be interested in hearing  similar approaches to Islamic music, which do
> exist.

Please let me know about them!
I think that what you consider radical is, in those particular contexts (islamic,
jewish) : secular.
There's an inherent contradiction in a person believing God created the world in
7 days about 6000 years ago being Avant-Garde.
Religion is by essence conservative. It is not about investigation and
questioning, it is about Revelation (to about one person) and obedience (by the
rest).
Islam means submission in arabic.
The Isreali settlers and the guy who shot Itzak Rabin are, without a doubt,
radical Jewish.
Bertold Brecht and Morton Feldman were secular.
The Berrigan brothers, militant priests against the Vietnam war, were radical
humanists. They were radical+ catholic, not radical catholics: they did not
proselithize cathechism. They fought for the rights of atheists and buddhists.
The very idea of radicality as you mean it: -socially conscious, change-oriented,
ultra-new-, is entirely western and secular.
The most radical "Islamic" music I know of is Ra∩, Algeria's answer to rock'n
roll, no more Islamic than Reggae is Jewish.

D.Y.



>
>
>
> -

- --------------9B1743DEC418E00745A47CC5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>

<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<p>Yes, Radical (rightist, for lack of a better term) Islam is as you describe
<br>it. However, I was referring to a Radical (leftist) Islam that would
depart
<br>considerably from the norm of Islam (which is after all one of the
<br>definitions of the word radical) IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION! Perhaps
Turkey
<br>in the 70s, especially in films, was an Islamic culture that was pretty
far
<br>left of what was and is the norm. That type of radical.
<p>
;
you seemed not to understand the context that
<br>Radical Jewish Culture is being used in here and I was obiously suggesting
<br>I'd be interested in hearing  similar approaches to Islamic music,
which do
<br>exist.</blockquote>
Please let me know about them!
<br>I think that what you consider radical is, in those particular contexts
(islamic, jewish) : <u>secular</u>.
<br>There's an inherent contradiction in a person believing God created
the world in 7 days about 6000 years ago being Avant-Garde.
<br>Religion is by essence conservative. It is not about investigation
and questioning, it is about Revelation (to about one person) and obedience
(by the rest).
<br>Islam means submission in arabic.
<br>The Isreali settlers and the guy who shot Itzak Rabin are, without
a doubt, radical Jewish.
<br>Bertold Brecht and Morton Feldman were secular.
<br>The Berrigan brothers, militant priests against the Vietnam war, were
radical humanists. They were radical+ catholic, not radical catholics:
they did not proselithize cathechism. They fought for the rights of atheists
and buddhists.
<br>The very idea of radicality as you mean it: -socially conscious, change-oriented,
ultra-new-, is entirely western and secular.
<br>The most radical "Islamic" music I know of is Raï, Algeria's answer
to rock'n roll, no more Islamic than Reggae is Jewish.
<p>D.Y.
<br>
<br>
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<br>
<p>-</blockquote>
</html>

- --------------9B1743DEC418E00745A47CC5--


- -

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:37:27 -0600
From: Joseph Zitt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: zorn/zionism (for Yahwe's sake!)

On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 01:36:25AM +0100, duncan youngerman wrote:

> I think that what you consider radical is, in those particular contexts=
 (islamic,
> jewish) : secular.

Secularized Judaism can be one instance of radical Judaism. So can the
extreme Orthodox. Neither makes the other non-radical. What each has
in common is *re-examining* the "radix (root)" of Judaism and
developing their views from that reexaminsation. And different people
will believe different aspects to be the "root" and base their
rebuildings on each.

I am closest to a branch of Judaism that some consider "radical":
Reconstructionist Judaism. As founded by Mardecai Kaplan in the
mid-20th century, it took a look at what were core beliefs and rebuilt
from there following Kaplan's idea that "the pasthas a vote, not a
veto".

> There's an inherent contradiction in a person believing God created the=
 world in
> 7 days about 6000 years ago being Avant-Garde.

In what sense?

FWIW, as I was taught, the concept of "days" is a metaphor (after all,
what does "it was evening then it was moring" mean when planets hadn't
yet come into being?). Viewed as seven *phases* of creation, taking
into account the ambiguities in the original Hebrew, it actually maps
pretty well into current scientific views.

> Religion is by essence conservative. It is not about investigation and
> questioning, it is about Revelation (to about one person) and obedience=
 (by the
> rest).

*Some* religion fits your narrow criteria. But investigation and
questioning is *essential* to Judaism, as any examination of its
historical texts can easily show you.

> The Isreali settlers and the guy who shot Itzak Rabin are, without a do=
ubt,
> radical Jewish.

Yes, under one branch of "radical".

> Bertold Brecht and Morton Feldman were secular.

Yes, and?

> The Berrigan brothers, militant priests against the Vietnam war, were r=
adical
> humanists. They were radical+ catholic, not radical catholics: they did=
 not
> proselithize cathechism. They fought for the rights of atheists and bud=
dhists.

Yes, and?

> The very idea of radicality as you mean it: -socially conscious, change=
- -oriented,
> ultra-new-, is entirely western and secular.

Why do you say this? Is the Dalai Lama western and secular?

> The most radical "Islamic" music I know of is Ra=EF, Algeria's answer t=
o rock'n
> roll, no more Islamic than Reggae is Jewish.

Have you heard Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan's reworkings of traditional
Qawalli music with Michael Brook and with Bally Sagoo? That is
indisputably radical Islamic music, under any definition.

- --=20
|> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <|
| [e-mail]           http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt |
| Latest CDs: Collaborations/ All Souls  http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt |
| Comma: Voices of New Music    Silence: the John Cage Discussion List |


- -

------------------------------

End of Zorn List Digest V3 #622
*******************************


 To unsubscribe from zorn-list-digest, send an email to
       "[e-mail]"
 with
       "unsubscribe zorn-list-digest"
 in the body of the message.

 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

 A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
 subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "zorn-list-digest"
 in the commands above with "zorn-list".

 Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from ftp.xmission.com, in
 pub/lists/zorn-list/archive.  These are organized by date.

 Problems? Email the list owner at [e-mail]