[HANASHIR:16576] Re: "Quality" and the teachings of Danny Maseng

[Andy Curry <acurry...>]

Adrian, Danny, and all -

I've enjoyed this discussion.

Adrian, I believe that our ears - and by that I mean our ability to discern 
critically the qualities of any given musical performance - develop over 
time with maturity, talent, and practice.  A blatant example:  When I was 
14, I thought the Surfaris' "Wipe Out" was a great record (and millions, 
apparently, agreed with me). Now, at 52, I hear a drummer who can't keep it 
up for two minutes, a bassist someone picked up off the street, and a 
guitar badly in need of intonation.  In other words, poor 
technique.  However, there's a certain passion to the performance, and it 
was and still is FUN.  But I certainly wouldn't buy it now, because I can't 
listen to it with uncritical ears anymore.

I don't think anyone would dispute that, as a group, musicians possess 
better ears (see above for my definition) than the public at large 
(ha-am).  There are many my age who CAN hear "Wipe Out" and enjoy it 
uncritically.  But are we musicians not a subset of ha-am, or "amcha"?

To take Adrian's argument into the larger world of pop music:  Apparently, 
"amcha" has decided - voting by dollars - that the likes of Britney Spears 
and 'n Sync are more worthy than, say, Miles Davis and Joan Baez.  Am I 
elitist for disagreeing?  Am I a musician for disagreeing? Or is it all 
simply a matter of taste?

Last fall I attended a Jewish Arts Festival.  One of the acts did only 
original music and had quite a large and vocal following. I listened to 
their entire set and found their music, although performed competently and 
sincerely, to be embarassingly vapid.  If they had been performing covers 
of widely-known music, it would have been competent - good enough to tap 
your toe to - but not exciting.  So, in my opinion, they did an inadequate 
job of selling their material.

Are their fans wrong?  I can't say they are, but I wonder if they would 
feel the same were the performers not personally known to them.

But I'm not wrong, either.  Passion and technique, in adequate measure, can 
sell poor material, but without some degree of both passion and technique, 
great material can die.  This group didn't sell ME on their music, and I 
suspect I'm not alone.

In a related way:
When I attend services, I like to participate by singing along, responding 
in the appropriate places, etc..
If the baal tfila has a soft voice or inconsistent tempi, "amcha" may be 
quite satisfied, as most sing along in a barely audible voice.  They can 
hear just fine.  I, on the other hand, have trouble, because I can't sing 
in my normal voice AND hear the leader.  Is it all my problem?  Should I 
also sing along in a barely audible voice?  Yes, I will tell the leader 
yashar koach and shake his hand, but I'll also be looking for another place 
to worship.

So, in conclusion:  I'm not against amcha determining de facto 
standards.  I just think that we, who as a group have more developed ears, 
should not refrain from providing our input to that process.

Kol tuv,
Andy

At 07:23 PM 1/10/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>That's all well and good Danny, but I'll respond to you the same as I did 
>to others--
>
>who is the arbiter of what quality is?
>
>Your own Chattanooga example backs up my own answer--it is and should be 
>amcha, and NOT the musicians themselves. That is what is troubling me 
>about this whole discussion. I hear a hue and cry from the artists that 
>they should be the ones making the standard, and hear them bemoaning 
>things that are of less quality in their opinion--yet failing to 
>understand the underlying passion of the person they are criticizing.
>
>The musicians are entitled, within their fraternity, to have their own 
>ideas of what is and is not quality, and to have and share mutual respect, 
>but it is not up to them to decide for amcha what quality is. And that is 
>the nub of my argument. I certainly never suggested that we shouldn't 
>strive to do our best. I am simply arguing about who has the right to 
>decide when someone is not doing their best!
>
>Let's take an example from your own history. Sometimes, what  campers got 
>from a simple open talent show is as much value to them and the audience 
>as was an exquisite performance from the Tiferet campers. Both have their 
>place, both are needed. And yes, in both cases, we should expect people to 
>do their best. But I was equally enthralled and entertained by both. Just 
>as I can sometimes enjoy a HS musical production more than a high-priced 
>professional one.
>
>Are we perhaps confusing "quality" with "pride of effort" ? One may put 
>all their heart and soul into an effort, yet another person may not find 
>that effort of quality. And my point is, who are we to make that kind of 
>judgment? That judgment is best left to amcha, and ultimately, to the One 
>Great Judge, whose name should be forever blessed.
>
>-Adrian
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org [mailto:owner-hanashir (at) 
>shamash(dot)org] On 
>Behalf Of DMASENG (at) aol(dot)com
>Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 6:05 PM
>To: hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org
>Subject: [HANASHIR:16541] Re: "Quality" and the teachings of Danny Maseng
>
>Hello all,
>
>I just wanted to respond to the comments made by Ros regarding quality and 
>context.
>
>Ros wrote:
>"As I said in my earlier letter, the degree of 'quality' required depends 
>on the context and the purpose.  Danny Maseng (as described in Shirona's 
>letter) was preparing a show to which he was asking many large audiences 
>to pay money to see.  This had better be top quality, to fulfill his side 
>of the contract"...
>
>Leaving aside arguments about teaching, writing and singing for the love 
>of it, there is no context in which quality is not a necessity. Whether I 
>write, sing or teach for large or small groups, for great sums of money or 
>none at all -- the quality must be at the very core of what I do. It's an 
>obligation of the soul, of the mind, of the very stuff an 'artist' is made of.
>
>I once witnessed a Sunday evening town gathering outside Chattanooga 
>Tennessee. Amateur musicians came from around the region, played and sang 
>for hours before a crowd of local folk of all ages, seated on the wooden 
>floor. The music was magical and the crowd's appreciation was in direct 
>proportion to the quality of music they were experiencing. This was an 
>affirmation of community and culture on the highest level. No one was paid 
>to perform, no one paid to get in. Money is NEVER the issue. It's about 
>pride in one's culture. It's about gratitude for the gift of music. It's 
>about a sense of obligation towards the listener, the instrument, the gift 
>itself.
>
>When we settle for less we are teaching our children, our peers and the 
>rest of the world that quality doesn't really matter to us. That our own 
>culture doesn't deserve all we've got to give so long as it 'feels good.' 
>That message has, indeed, been out there for a long time and it has hurt 
>us deeply. Most American Jews won't listen to, let a lone buy, Jewish 
>music for that very reason. There is a perception of Jewish music as 
>schlock, even though there is some good stuff out there and it keeps 
>getting incrementally better.
>
>The story about the grandchild is sweet and touching and has nothing to do 
>with this issue. The issue is that beyond the sweet connection to Hebrew 
>and all things Jewish, there must be an aesthetic beauty, a truth, a 
>quality that is undeniable. To settle for anything less is to doom our 
>culture to triviality and irrelevance.
>
>One last thing: Musicians who get paid are also doing it primarily for the 
>love of it. If they're not -- they should get out of the business. One 
>pays a very high price for toiling in this field and there are far better 
>ways to make money.  Whether we sing in Synagogue or at home, whether we 
>are performing for free or for pay -- the level of our effort should 
>always reach for the heavens. Our aspirations and expectations should aim 
>as high as our imagination can conceive.
>
>Shavua Tov,
>
>Danny Maseng,
>Artistic Director,
>The Brandeis-Bardin Institute
><http://www.dannymaseng.com/>www.dannymaseng.com

*******************************
Andy Curry
Field Applications Engineer
SchlumbergerSema
11146 Thompson Ave
Lenexa KS 66219
Office: 913-312-4739
Mobile: 913-226-1447
Facsimile: 913-312-4701
Home : 913-663-1647
E-Mail: acurry (at) lenexa(dot)sema(dot)slb(dot)com
*******************************

------------------------ hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org -----------------------+
Hosted by Shamash: The Jewish Network, http://shamash.org  
a service of Hebrew College, which offers online courses and an
online MA in Jewish Studies, http://hebrewcollege.edu/online/

To unsubscribe email listproc (at) shamash(dot)org and have your message read:
unsubscribe hanashir
------------------------ hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org -----------------------=