John P. wrote:
> "Don Evans" <gtrdonevans@aol.com> wrote in a message
>
>>> Aside from that, there is some segment of people that claim to like
>>> or "get" an artist, because they are trying to create an impression
>>> of themselves.
>
>> Couldn't it just be because they do ... get it?
>
> Yup... it sure could be. As you may have noted, by reading what I
> wrote; "there is some segment of people" ... meaning this is a group
> of people, not all people. The people who fit into that group are
> those who match the characteristics of that group. If they fail to
> meet those characteristics, they do not belong to that group.
>
>> What you seem to be saying here is that you think there isn't
>> anything to get.
>
> Actually, the people I was ragging on are those who don't actually
> get it, but feel the need to say they do. I suggested this same group
> is the type who needs to wear their clothing labels on the outside.
>
> That doesn't refer to everyone who claims to "get it". It possibel
> that some people who "get it", still don't like Zappa's music.
Yeah, or like some but not all of it. I think part of the problem is
substituting "it sucks" for "I don't like it". To me, "getting it" has to
do with the work or works resonating with you ... not with being part of a
Zappa fan club. When you "get" the joke ... it just means you think it's
funny .. nothing more. It promotes a response. Not everyone has the same
sense of humor, right? So if I say I "get" Zappa, that doesn't mean I think
I'm superior, it just means his stuff does it for me ... not sure why there
is so much heat about this.
>Zappa
> was pretty clear in his message. As I mentioned previously, "getting
> it" wasn't rocket science.
>
>>> Likely, these same people feel the need to wear their
>>> clothing labels on the outside. Zappa was exactly the type of artist
>>> who would attract these clowns. They get more from saying "I get
>>> Zappa and I don't like that mainstream crap", then they actually do
>>> from listening to his music, or appreciating his work.
>
>> And you know this ... how?
>
> From meeting and talking to thousands of people over my lifetime. Are
> you honestly telling me you've never met anyone who felt the need to
> wear their clothing labels on the outside? You've never heard of
> designer label clothes? You've never heard of a poser? Everyone
> you've talked to over the course of your entire life has been an
> honest, straight up, pillar of society?
>
> Bullshit.
I was taking what you were saying to be directed at the people in this
thread, not the whole world. Of course what you say right there is true,
but I think I just felt the ground shift under your point.
>
>> I really haven't seen a lot of posts saying that "I get Zappa
>> *and* I don't like that mainstream crap". Rather, I've seen guys
>> saying they get some aspect or other about Zappa and
>> his music.
>
> Hopefully this isn't news to you, but there are millions of people
> who exist outside of Usenet.
Yeah, but again, it seemed you were referring to those close at hand.
>
>>> While I can, and do, respect other's opinions and
>>> the work of artists I may not particularly care for,
>>> I have no respect for these type of people. Their
>>> opinions are meaningless, because even *they*
>>> don't believe them. They are simply parroting a
>>> line in the hopes of making you believe they are
>>> something they are not.
>
>> And, evidently, people who get what Zappa was doing are all this
>> kind of people ... or isn't that what you were saying.
>
> Just read it and take it at face value. There are *some* people who
> are posers. Period. *Some* of these people who fall into that group,
> may like Frank Zappa, or claim to, and some may not. It has nothing
> to do with Zappa.
>> And, of course, that doesn't include you. ;-)
>
> Correct. What I wear, what I drive, the music I like, is not based on
> me attempting to create an illusion I am something I am not. I feel
> no need to wear my clothing labels on the outside. I feel no need to
> tell anyone how much money I spent on something.
>
>> What I find interesting is that somehow the quality of art is being
>> found to be nothing more than opinion. It's a view very reflective
>> of modern times, but IMO it's just another part of the dumbing down
>> of society.
>
> Personal like or dislike of art has never been anything other than
> opinion.
But, as I said earlier, like or dislike doesn't necessarily reflect quality
of art either. At the absolute most rudimentary level, the fact I don't
like chocolate ice cream doesn't mean it's not good chocolate ice cream.
And the fact that I don't "get" the shades of difference between good and
crap ice cream doesn't mean the differences aren't there.
I'm pretty bad at philosophy arguments, so I'll probably bail here, but I
just wanted to get my thoughts out.
Don
