Subject: Re: [Harp-L] Re: criticism/response to Larry

[EGS1217@xxxxxxx]

Larry writes: (and all comments in quotes are his)...
 
"I am decidedly on the side of those who believe that criticism is useful  
for all of us on the list."
 
 I don't necessarily disagree with you in principle.  If you  don't object to 
being critiqued in public by fellow harmonica  players as a teaching lesson 
for other harmonica players, that is  absolutely your right.

"I agree that if you make a public performance,  you have already decided 
by default that you are prepared for  criticism."
 
This was the issue.  Was the performance "public" or do we just  interpret 
everything anyone does today as "public"...ergo, losing/giving  up their right 
to privacy if they so much as have a photo or article in a  newspaper?  I 
differed in my interpretation of whether or not a person  putting a video on 
YouTube expected it to be taken to a completely separate web  page for purposes of 
criticism, when it would have been simple to put the  criticisms on his/her 
site....specifically set up for that purpose? 
 
 I further posit that a joint "discussion" on both his page and  harp-l would 
not have bothered me half so much, as long as the subject  of the criticisms 
was aware of his playing being such a focus.  
 

"If you are an artist and 
you have confidence in what you are  doing, then a negative critique 
shouldn't matter to you."
 
I've just read Bob Laughlin's explanation of his own "growing up as a  
performer".  He said it very well.  Not everyone has the  confidence you expect.  
Why should it be assumed that every artist is  confident?  Actually, I believe 
statistics usually prove the contrary to be  true.  
 
 "If you don't have confidence in what you are 
doing, then please  don't inflict your stuff on the rest of us."
 
Now this is where we're poles apart.  Not only did the  performer in question 
not "inflict his stuff" (performance) on anyone on  Harp-l (do we at least 
agree on that point?), 
 
....but I also don't understand why you feel that anyone putting  out any 
video...especially an amateur video (as most are on YouTube),  should at all be 
expected to be performing at Professional levels....the kind  where one 'might' 
be expected to have a reasonable degree of  confidence...just because someone 
ELSE chose to take that video and critique it  elsewhere.  
 
This was part of my original point.  If the video was left in situ, it  would 
have been accepted for what it was...not examined under a  microscope or 
expected to be at the level of all the experts on  harp-l.
 
 The entire premise of YouTube is that anyone at any time can put  anything 
up. People film their dogs, cats, children, birthday parties,  weddings, people 
falling off bikes... It isn't "inflicting" it on anyone  else...unless the 
viewer "chooses" to watch (and consider  themselves "inflicted").
 
And again...this implies that an amateur musician is somehow  hurting the 
rest of us by not being "perfect".  What is wrong with 1) NOT  watching his/her 
videos, 2) NOT commenting one way or the other if one does  decide to watch and 
finds the performance not up to one's standards, and  3)What gives us all the 
right as musicians (one of my original questions) to sit  in judgment of our 
fellows...in any field?  I know for certain that no one  died and made ME 
Judge and Jury of another musician's level of playing, at least  insofar as to 
publish a negative criticism.  
 
I (and most people I know who are not harmonica players) choose to listen  to 
 music which pleases my ear.  I purchase CD's based on my enjoyment  of a 
performer's music.  I switch radio stations if music comes on that  grates on my 
nerves. That is how I "speak" my opinion of what I like and  dislike. I won't 
buy music I don't like..I won't grant permission for  musicians whose music 
displeases me to link to my webpage. I express my opinions  of music in other 
such benign ways.   Dissecting someone for the sake  of dissection comes across 
to me (and many non musicians I know) as cruelty for  cruelty's sake.  


"For all the others, a detailed and specific  criticism can both inform 
and stir our own feelings."
 
They can.  IF the person who is being criticized asks for and expects  the 
criticism, and doesn't mind being used as a teaching tool for the rest of  us.  
Was that the case here?  Then again..who were those giving the  critiques?  
Just other fellow harmonica players.  Do you automatically  assume they were 
qualified and/or unbiased?  Perhaps.  Perhaps  not.


"I further agree that Elizabeth's response, while it was  friendly, is 
none the less a form of ad hominem attack; that is, it attacks  the 
person or hir actions, not the validity of hir arguments."
 
Larry Marks, Really Senior Software Geek


Well, Larry, sorry to  have to disagree completely with your interpretation 
of my comments as an  "attack", while you do the very same to my reasoned out 
response.  ;)  You've now "attacked" my right to express an opinion about a  
particular method of criticism. Mine was nothing of the kind,  especially since 
I specifically DID disagree with the validity of their  arguments.  I also 
pointed out that it would make a lot more  sense...and be far kinder to an 
amateur fellow harmonica player, to take  the criticism TO the site where the video 
was made, and where the performer  fully expects these kinds of responses. 
 
No point in going round in well-worn circles. Thanks for your comments. I'm  
sending you under separate cover, my responses to Jonathan and Martin,  
disallowed on Harp-L, to read or not. ;)
 
 
Elizabeth
 








************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com