YOU ARE IN THE MEETING@LIVINGROOM.ORG ARCHIVES.
TO READ NEW MESSAGES, CLICK HERE

Re: How To Evaluate-Judge-Quantify

Aliyah Baruchin (ab362@columbia.edu)
Tue, 3 Jun 1997 22:21:23 -0400 (EDT)

Larry Hewes (Hi, Larry! Good to see you on here.) wrote:

>While the "level" of one's formal education in music shouldn't determine
>whether one listens or creates, or our reaction to such creation, what
>does matter is what one does with what one has. In that regard, an
>education, in the best sense of that word, is a good thing.

I'm Aliyah Baruchin, a journalist in NYC, a musician but not an educated
music theorist, and I was a good friend of Randy Hostetler. I learned
pretty much what Larry said above from Randy, who had a ton of education,
musical and otherwise, but also had an unlimited interest in different
musical and acoustic forms, and who rejected out of hand the
academy's distinctions between high and low culture.

So I thought I'd throw out a question, not coming from any particular
opinion -- just something I was curious about: there is a school of
American painting called "primitive" or "naive," which consists largely of
paintings by artists with no formal training or education, many of them
from rural areas, and the stuff is (I think) extraordinarily interesting.
Is there any sort of a movement in contemporary music, or composition in
particular, that resembles this? Is that even possible, or does the
mathematical element of composing demand at least some training?

--Aliyah Baruchin