"When I say =91no=92 I=92m always right and when I say =91yes=92=
=20
I=92m almost always wrong."
-- Dwight Macdonald
np: nothing
nr: John Lanchester, _The Debt to Pleasure_
- -
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 02:53:55 +0100
From: duncan youngerman <y-man@wanadoo.fr>
Subject: Re: How come?(Radical Jewish Kultur)
Joseph Zitt a =E9crit :
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 10:02:46PM +0100, duncan youngerman wrote:
>
> > Germanic music was at it's best (Bach through Romanticism) when it
> > did'nt think of itself as historically superior, or even germanic in the
> > first place(Mozart wrote operas in french and italian, Beethoven loved
> > the French Revolution and Hinduist philosophy, etc=2E)!=2E When it did t=
hink
> > itself as this falsly homogeneous, distinct and superior culture
> > (post-Wagnerianism to the present, by way of the Third Reich) it stopped
> > to produce things of much interest=2E
>
> The difference here is that Radical Jewish Culture in no way presents
> itself as "superior" to other music=2E And the artists in the series
> continue to work within other contexts=2E
There's something dubious in this age of globalisation, single European
currency, and Eucumenical United Nations organisations to emphasize
"radically" the racial or religious nature of a cultural group, especially
when it has little if anything to do with the activity at hand, and comes ou=
t
of an utterly cosmopolitan cultural environment=2E It can only be perceived =
as
a gratuitous provocation or agression (albeit in this case an innocuous one)
when the (civilized) world at large is making unprecedented efforts to tone
down and transcend its shrill particularisms=2E
> > I also happen to find the Radical Jewish Culture series in dreadful
> > taste in relation to the daily bulldozing and shooting in the occupied
> > territories of Palestine=2E
>
> That evinces either a confusion of Judaism as a whole with the specific
> implementation of Zionism regrettably in prectice there, or simple
> anti-Jewish prejudice=2E Which is it?
John Ashcroft or Donald Rumsfeld react just like you at the slightest
questionning of America=2E
You cannot deny that Judaism (just like Islam or Christianity, and even now
Hinduism) is being used as a pretext for dehumanisation and hatred of what's
different=2E And therefore to wave that flag implies a responsability=2E A p=
erson
claiming to be a Radical Germanic Artist in the 1930's would have faced
criticism, and rightfully so=2E
> > As for the remarketing of Serge Gainsbourg or Burt Bacharach under this
> > umbrella, it's a clever, eye-catching provocation but as unconnected to
> > reality as the linking by some of Iran to North Korea=2E
>
> I raised my eyebrow at those choices too, and didn't get them=2E But I
> don't begrudge Zorn his ability to choose to package and release these
> recordings in this way, and am intrigued by the way that these
> releases raised the issue of what Jewish Culture actually is=2E
>
> > Jaco Pastorius: Radical Italian culture=2E
> > Edgar Allen Poe: Radical Protestant culture=2E
> > Mao Tse Toung: Radical Confucian culture=2E
>
> And you would, indeed, be as free to release them as such as Tzadik is
> to release the Radical Jewish Culture series=2E Congratulations=2E
I'd be a radical asshole!
D=2E
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 21:05:26 -0600
From: Joseph Zitt <jzitt@metatronpress.com>
Subject: Re: How Come?
On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 05:23:29PM -0800, john schuller wrote:
> >In what way are you incapable of seeing this?
>
> Explain your view of how that is complaining about Political Correctness and
> I will see the way the I am currently incapable of seeing this. Do it. I
> dare ya.
Explain to me how you are not seeing it, and I will fill in the gap.
> Because the marketing of those projects promotes seperation. People hanging
> out with others of like backgrounds etc. just promotes people hanging out.
Again: you find some unstated problem with people creating projects
(which, of course, are inextricable from that to which I am guessing
that you refer by the term "marketing") based on that which they find
that they have in common with some others. If you do not find this to
be a problem, then explain why you approve of other projects that can
safely be predicted not to be of interest to any other subset of the
world population.
> Not "Look at me, I am different because I was born with different
> genetalia"...
If you consider women's issues to be a simple matter of "genitalia",
you demonstrate your further incomprehension of the lives of people
other than yourself.
> > > How? I don't dislike the recording projects. I dislike that they are
> > > marketed the way they are.
> >
> >How are you drawing this distinction?
>
> Here is our "People with Vagina" series. Etc. Etc.
Again: how are you drawing the difference between the recording and marketing of the Radical Jewish Culture series? With the possible exception of the Great Jewish Composers trilogy (which I suspect is the joker in the deck), the other items in the series are particularly relevant to Jewish culture, and were primarily created expressly for that series.
Your repeated issue with "genetalia" (sic) and "Vagina" is best left
as a matter for your therapist.
> >Yet you find it, and not the others, as a valid parameter for
> >aggregation. I ask again: why?
>
> It is valid just because all it is a geographical spot. In different
> countries the music can be very different from others. Sort of like how
> people with penises make different music than those with vaginas. They
> should all be in seperate a seperate Music Series.
Unfortunately, possibly as a result of the displayed psychosexual issues, the above paragraph has lost even syntactical coherence. Try again?
> >Thus confirming the earlier suggestion that you are unfamiliar with
> >more than a trivial concept of religious belief and practice.
>
> That is because religion is a lifestyle choice that I have ZERO interest in.
> It is a life style that is not for me. To me- all religious practices and
> belief are trivial.
"trivial"... "ZERO interest"... yet you repeatedly and vociferously
condemn its expression in art. Curious.
That you project your lack of interest in it into a demand that you
place on others fits snugly into the arrogant solipsism which you have
