Re: mp3's

Re: mp3's

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Software Discussion ]

Posted by Henry Emrich (from: 66.167.250.105) on November 16, 2002 at 14:06:15:

In Reply to: mp3's posted by Brian Gabel on September 19, 2002 at 15:35:32:

Okay. I've got to take issue with a few of your points, first because they are blatantly innacurate, and secondly, because they play into the anti-capitalistic mindset so prevalent (especially) the college community.

" Prior to the 20th century, only the well-to-do could afford the luxury of music which even they indulged infrequently. Common folk heard very little music. The gift remained pure and special. Today we are submerged in rapidly fermenting bath of audio-visual mayhem. The laws of capitalism have reduced our experience of music to reflect Joe Public's tastes."

Okay, let's take the points one at a time:

1. obviously, you define "music" as what? Classical? Baroque? Otherwise you wouldn't have come up with this lie about the 'average people" hearing very little music in the past. In all epochs of history, ther have been FAR RICHER 'folk traditions' than the court-music could ever produce, and FAR MORE of it.
Moreover, your apperent disdain for "john Q Public's tastes" and the "laws of capitalism" brand you as either a socialist/communist, or a completely elitest person. This is rather paradoxical, given your obvious egalitarian notions implicit in the whole "god shares freely" thing, and your disdain for the fact that music actually COSTS to PRODUCE.
I am deeply saddened by the fact that this culture (world culture, really) has slipped so far toward an entitlement mentality, anti-capitalism, elitist mentality, and all the other assorted evils of modern Left-wing thought.
I suppose next you will be castigating marketers of shareware software products for having the temerity to actually request financial reimbursement for their efforts.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: : Okay. I've got to take issue with a few of your points, first because they are blatantly innacurate, and secondly, because they play into the anti-capitalistic mindset so prevalent (especially) the college community. : " Prior to the 20th century, only the well-to-do could afford the luxury of music which even they indulged infrequently. Common folk heard very little music. The gift remained pure and special. Today we are submerged in rapidly fermenting bath of audio-visual mayhem. The laws of capitalism have reduced our experience of music to reflect Joe Public's tastes." : : Okay, let's take the points one at a time: : : 1. obviously, you define "music" as what? Classical? Baroque? Otherwise you wouldn't have come up with this lie about the 'average people" hearing very little music in the past. In all epochs of history, ther have been FAR RICHER 'folk traditions' than the court-music could ever produce, and FAR MORE of it. : Moreover, your apperent disdain for "john Q Public's tastes" and the "laws of capitalism" brand you as either a socialist/communist, or a completely elitest person. This is rather paradoxical, given your obvious egalitarian notions implicit in the whole "god shares freely" thing, and your disdain for the fact that music actually COSTS to PRODUCE. : I am deeply saddened by the fact that this culture (world culture, really) has slipped so far toward an entitlement mentality, anti-capitalism, elitist mentality, and all the other assorted evils of modern Left-wing thought. : I suppose next you will be castigating marketers of shareware software products for having the temerity to actually request financial reimbursement for their efforts.
Click here to be notified by email when someone replies to your message

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Software Discussion ]