[lbo-talk] class and classical music

[shag carpet bomb]

At 01:08 PM 8/27/2009, Jeffrey Fisher wrote:
>I just don't see why we need to dichotomize the options: either (a) music
>originated in people cavorting about, or (b) music originated in people
>thinking. And then, why does the "origin" have to determine what music is
>for any of us
>now, or what music has become and might become in the future. Whether
>or not music (in some Platonic form) originated (Platonically, not
>historically/chronologically) in dance
>is simply not determinative. So I suppose I think there's a certain
>nostalgic tilt to Joann's perspective that's what I would object to. It's
>the sort of thing that you can understand driving a given person's
>appreciation of music, but to universalize it is another thing altogether.

does seem like a chicken/egg thing, doesn't it? i mean, if the drive to 
dance exists first, then it inspires people to be dancing to some tune in 
their head? or do they just dance about? and then decide to enrich this 
activity by figuring out a way to make the music that is in their heads?

my just so story would be that people's first music was created with the 
hands on their own bodies, in a group of two or more: paddy cake. in which 
case, favoring body or mind makes no sense. but that's my just so story. :)