Composers' Forum

Music Composers Unite!

Can you hear the music in this?

Views: 2598

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion



"Wow Olm...


"Aren't you afraid you'll be black listed for divulging all this information about the government?"


I was already blacklisted decades ago, for inviting a former Soviet citizen to live with us, after the collapse of the USSR, and during the time of the first Gulf War.  She wasn't even a "communist." I gently closed the door in the face of an FBI agent who tried to get into my house and interogate me. I said, you don't have the right to come in, or to ask me questions, and I have the right NOT to answer.  You too can find out if you are blacklisted.  Just send a FOIA request into the FBI for your file.


"And, can you possibly keep from trying to humiliate others on this forum? Whew!!!......."


Who has been humiliated, and how have they been humiliated?  Are you complaining on someone else's behalf, or on your own?  I don't think I said you or  anyone here is an "anti-Semite."  In fact, if you will read what I wrote in a very recent post, and read it carefully, you will see I said the opposite.  




"a member of any of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic language, including in particular the Jews and Arabs"


You are defining the word "Semite."  However, in the English language, the word "anti-Semitic" has connotations and denotations that are well known, and can be looked up on any dictionary.


anti-Semitic:  "a person who discriminates against or is prejudiced or hostile toward Jews."  [Random House].


"prejudiced against or hostile to Jews"  [Collins English Dictionary]


"a person who persecutes or discriminates against Jews" [Collins Complete and Unabridged Dictionary.]


For the etymology and response to those who object to this use, see the online etymological dictionary:


Word Origin and History for anti-Semitism



also antisemitism, 1881, from German Antisemitismus, first used by Wilhelm Marr (1819-1904) German radical, nationalist and race-agitator, who founded the Antisemiten-Liga in 1879; see anti- + Semite.


Not etymologically restricted to anti-Jewish theories, actions, or policies, but almost always used in this sense. Those who object to the inaccuracy of the term might try Hermann Adler's Judaeophobia (1882). Anti-Semitic (also antisemitic) and anti-Semite (also antisemite) also are from 1881, like anti-Semitism they appear first in English in an article in the "Athenaeum" of Sept. 31, in reference to German literature.

Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper





"The next time I'm accused of be anti-Semitic, which happens way too often, I can just say, 'No, I'm pro-American.'"


When were you last accused of being anti-Semitic? Have you ever been accused of being anti-Semitic?  I think Mariza, perhaps one other person, and I were asking for clarification.  There were definitely anti-Semitic statements put forward in a recently linked video.  Personally, I wanted clarification, and to be reassured that anti-Semitic views were not being espoused on the site.  That's a far cry from saying anyone is an anti-Semite.


I don't understand your statement, "I can just say, 'No, I'm pro-American.'"


What does the question of one's attitude toward Jews as a race have to do with being pro-American or not pro-American?  I don't think there is any logical connection at all.  One can be "pro-American" (supposedly) and be "anti-Semitic."  One can be "anti-American" and be anti-Semitic as well.  There are many ways that these beliefs and feelings, and variations on them, can exist in one single person.


But am I to understand that you are calling yourself "pro-American?" I am not sure I understand what that means.  I remember a comedian (Chris Rock) who made a movie, in which he ran as a fictional candidate for the Presidency.  He would end campaign speeches saying, "God bless America, and no place else."  That's not what you mean by "pro-American," do you?  I don't know if you believe in God or not, or if you do, whether you would want to bless America, or all the world.  If you would say, "God bless America," would you also be willing to say, something like, "God bless Egypt and God bless Israel-Palestine, and Syria, Pakistan and Russia?"


"So, if you are pro American and speak the English language, I guess you might be considered anti-Semitic?"


I think someone who speaks any language, and who is a "nationalist," and who endorses a video that contains an anti-Semitic statement (such as "Whenever a gentile hooks up with a Jew, it's only about money") MIGHT rightly be asked to clarify their views.


"Help me out here.."


I am trying to help.  I'm trying to distinguish requests for clarification of views from actual accusations of expressing anti-Semitic sentiments, or accusing someone of BEING an anti-Semite.  I am also trying to distinguish the discomfort that a number of people have expressed, with a video that clearly contained anti-Semitic expressions, from the idea that anyone has overtly accused anyone of BEING an anti-Semite.  I said in the recent post, I automatically assume that no one here IS an anti-Semite.  Please reread that post again, if it seemed unclear to you. 



"I'm just not getting the 'anti' part too well I guess. Isn't that like saying; I love football to an Hispanic then being accused of hating all Spanish people."


I think you are going very far afield with this comparison.  Excessive US style "patriotism," or nationalism can be associated with prejudice against some Spanish speaking people, especially Mexicans.   We see that phenomenon amongst a fair number of Donald Trump supporters.  On the other hand, one can be "patriotic" or moderately nationalistic and be virtually devoid of prejudices of any kind.  If saying "I love US style football" to a Latino or South American is intended as way of saying "I hate soccer, or international fútbol ... "  then, depending upon the context, the statement could be conceived as hostile, or even anti-Hispanic.  I mean, it's a bit absurd at the start for a US citizen to say to any foreigner, or even a Latino, "I love football," since football, in almost every country in the world, even in other English speaking countries (the UK, Canada, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand)  refers almost always to soccer and not to US style football.  It's ethnocentric for English speaking US citizens to assume otherwise.


[You know. Because there are a lot of great baseball players in the Spanish community..] 


You use the phrase "Spanish community."  I hope you don't mind the correction.  But "Spanish community" is not a phrase that makes sense, amongst Hispanics, Latinos or Chicanos who are living in the US, or citizens of the US.  Spanish, refers, in that sense, to people who are actually from the nation known as Spain.  People who are Latin American, or descendants of people from Latin America, never refer to themselves as members of the "Spanish community," or call themselves "Spanish" (any more than US English language speaking citizens call themselves "English.")


I say this simply because our conversation begins with the assumption (in my mind at least) that we need to learn and be sensitive, in an ever increasingly globalized world, with regard to nuances having to do with identity—ethnic, national, linguistic, or otherwise. 


It's something we learn gradually, and sometimes the hard way.  I learned while living in Colombia for instance, that it makes no sense for citizens of the US to call themselves "Americans."  "Nosotros somos americanos tambien; somos suramericanos."  [We are Americans, too; we are South Americans, they say in Colombia, and throughout the region]. 





hee-haw.... good 1 Fred

Fredrick zinos said:

"Why must you belittle those who are trying to catch up to you and

your omnisciousness"

everybody needs a hobby.

Bob, I have windows and it just loaded normally...

try a reboot  ???   maybe that'll work     RS

Peter, be it insidious or just playfully arrogant, it gets old fast.

Not to mention longwinded .

I was reminded of that Clinton ploy, it depends on what you mean by 'it'.

I won't post the hyperlink for fear of starting something with the mockers,

but if you have the time,  go to You Tube and find SGT Report.

Today, Sean featured an interview with Anita Whitney that puts in 'well defined'

terms and words what we are really up against and the 'boogieman' that doesn't exist.

(especially around 16 to 20 min. and the last few minutes)    RS    

ps- it truly defines the word insidious  

So this is what's become of Composers' Forum, eh?

Imagine how much more music could be written in the time wasted typing back and forth on subjects that have little do with composing music.

@Richard: happily, that only seems to happen in threads of little relevance to composing. I've been steering clear of those topics and it's done me wonders. Actually got much more composing done than when I have to keep thinking of the latest clever way to win another pointless argument.

Isn't Facebook for drivel? :)

Permit me to address these and similar comments about what people supposedly SHOULD write about on Composers' Forum.


Reply by Richard T. Hill 1 hour ago

So this is what's become of Composers' Forum, eh?


Imagine how much more music could be written in the time wasted typing back and forth on subjects that have little do with composing music.




Reply by H. S. Teoh 52 minutes ago


@Richard: happily, that only seems to happen in threads of little relevance to composing. I've been steering clear of those topics and it's done me wonders. Actually got much more composing done than when I have to keep thinking of the latest clever way to win another pointless argument.




Making this kind of point might be considered just a little bit silly, if we consider music history.   Would you tell Wagner, Mahler, Beethoven, Shostakovich and countless other well-known composers that they shouldn't have written all the letters they did (letters much longer and far more detailed than any of the posts we see here) about such issues as philosophy, ethics, political thought, the destiny of man, God, metaphysical speculation, the nature of space and time, Borodin's drinking habits, Tchaikovsky's sexual orientation, etc. etc. etc?    I wonder how many have looked at books of letters written by Beethoven, Mahler, and ESPECIALLY Wagner.  Volumes upon volumes by the last one.  (And you know:  he actually thought about philosophy, read and praised Schopenhauer, took copies into the public baths and read them out loud to his friends, and discussed the IDEAS).


If people are really that worried about "how others spend their time," perhaps they shouldn't write anything on Composers Forum; or they shouldn't write words anyway.   If people think time is being wasted, then they shouldn't waste time writing anything but music. 

I for one, believe:

[And if you are reasonably strict yourself, you shouldn't write about music itself, or ever comment upon the pieces, because writing about music has nothing to do with the actual composition of music, and occupies an entirely different part of the mind].


Now, if you like, you can put your hand on the Bible, and respond:


Do promise to put your thoughts wholly into music and NOTHING but the music, so help you God???!!!!


Now, you can swear, if you wish to:






Or you can simply say, I know exactly what people should and should not talk about, and make a list of subjects which are definitely relevant, and not relevant to "musical composition."  


H.S. said,


@Richard: happily, that only seems to happen in threads of little relevance to composing. I've been steering clear of those topics and it's done me wonders. Actually got much more composing done than when I have to keep thinking of the latest clever way to win another pointless argument.


H.S. Thou dost protest too much, perhaps.  I have seen many people (I think you might have been one of them, if you don't mind my saying so) chatting away about all sorts of supposedly irrelevant things in the chat box, including nuclear physics, cosmology, mathematics, artificial intelligence, just to list a few. 


Let's at least be consistent.


Now I say, it can be good for a composer to discuss nuclear physics, cosmology, mathematics, artificial intelligence.


But if people feel they have to spend inordinate amounts of time "thinking of the latest clever way to win another pointless argument ..."  (I mean, isn't this what all of us do, in the shower, while driving to work, in the midst of a conversation with friends and family ...), then maybe we should stop frequenting the Composers Forum all together. 


Or if you enjoy that sort of thing, then why not do it?


What amazes me most of all is when (on a forum, a place where people are supposed to talk) this happens:  People are told, it's bad to be on a forum.  They are told it's bad to talk.   People should only compose.  (Forgetting that all composers, worthy of the name, have talked, and gone to places where they could talk; forgetting that all composers have written letters, and felt it was a good thing to write down their thoughts in a letter, on numerous occasions, on a wide variety of topics).  I sometimes get the impression that people have not even read Titus Livius, or anything similar to the works of that great historian, and so they have no idea what the word "forum" really means, or what the origin of the concept is, much less what people discussed for literally 500 years, in the Roman Forum, when Rome was a representative Republic.   


Perhaps we should establish and open COMPOSERS NON-FORUM, where people don't talk, don't exchange ideas, don't think, don't engage in any dialectical reasoning whatsoever, or in any kind of public discourse.


Oops.  I just pet my dog for 15 seconds.  I hope no one who is serious about composition does that.  It might distract you from your work. 




Peter said,

"I'm a fan of the Keiser Report. Max is a little off the wall with bitcoin, but Stacy has her finger on the pulse of what's going on with the world economy, banksters, fraud etc.."

I watch the Keiser Report now and again myself, and enjoy it.  I agree with your assessment.

There aren't many economist/financial expert/comedians on TV, so it goes without saying he's the best in that arena.  His insights are, I think, closer to the truth than what you get on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, National Public TV, the BBC, and most standard financial  and business TV shows.

Richard, they've moved.... go to www. Wynn St. and make a left, then proceed

until you find the 3 yodeling bartenders; the one in the middle can point the way

from there.
Richard T. Hill said:

So this is what's become of Composers' Forum, eh?

Imagine how much more music could be written in the time wasted typing back and forth on subjects that have little do with composing music.

Dave, I'm curious, why I am obligated to respond to what you are saying and how I might be 'deflecting'

because I don't see your words to be worthy of a response?      Isn't this ironic?

do you recognize a difference between action and re-action?    

You say you find my lack of response to your post, of greater interest... Why?

That seems a bit demented and bordering the perverse.

As for 'witless drivel', The false corporate based gov'mt which started just after

the Civil War, has been slowly taking over this country and now 'they' control

the grants to the Arts( there are not many people that understand the breadth and

depths of this drivel, but the Facts are actually well documented- albeit hidden,)

without your even knowing it, you are a stock option. When your parents signed

your birth certificate, the hospital got money and you were owned. And your earnings

potential is traded. And the legal system is all about supporting this Corporate Entity.

Is that drivel to you? Take a few minutes and do a little research and you will soon

see that this is not a conspiracy of drool and drivel.

If you'd like to purchase a 'tin hat' I'm selling them at a special discount to all composers.  RS

Dave Dexter said:

I made no mention of the veracity or relevance. I just found it funny you did the very thing you were annoyed at having done to you. And for something or no relevance or consequence, it sure did get to you.

Actually, I'm a composer. But when there's so many, many foibles on display, how could I resist, right?

You don't actually have control over whatever you think the "real" discussion is, and the one I'm having, or at least failing to have because you're deflecting, is of far greater interest.

roger stancill said:

But Dave ... You fail to understand that someone attempting to belittle me is

totally irrelevant and of no real consequence. Just because someone may use that 'tactic'

does not mean that it is true or effective. This is not an ego trip. (tho' I do think there is something to be said for

fighting fire with fire)

so you are a watcher... delighting in the foibles of other humans.... everyone needs a hobby.     RS

ps- feel free to participate in the real discussion

So Fred, are you saying you get your investment tips from the wino in the

alley behind the Taco Bell there in downtown San Diego..... ha   that is funny!

80 proof is certaintly a better bet than the info you may be offered by someone

who is 'in the field'. ( the whole thing IS a crap shoot)

The function of 'mainstream media' information is to reassure the consumer that the

lies he/she has been fed are still alive and doing very well.   RS
Fredrick zinos said:

"legit info"

a contradiction in terms. How can something be informative and legitimate at the same time? The function of information is to reassure the consumer that he is reading "the truth" and in so doing has elevated him/herself above the herd of humanity who remain unenlightened.

Frankly, I crave information that is illegitimate because at least it has a chance of being funny. And that, I am sure we all agree, is the real purpose of life.

Reply to Discussion


Sign up info

Read before you sign up to find out what the requirements are!


© 2021   Created by Gav Brown.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service