Wagner vs. Stravinsky

Thelonious Monk, "The Composer"

-Round Midnight
-Bemsha Swing
-Rhythm-a-Ning
-Reflections
-Straight, No Chaser
-Brilliant Corners
-Ruby, My Dear
-Well You Needn't
-Blue Monk
-Criss Cross
-Crepusule With Nellie

Chet Baker - Mister B.
Mose Allison - Lessons in Living
Van Morrison - Pay the Devil
Dave Brubeck - Time Out


pavement early EPs
aphex twin, 26 remixes for cash
smiths, all
let it be...naked
birth of the cool
cherry & blackwell, corazon

(i leave out classical)


The difference between you and I: I don't see music as something that needs to be understood in order to be appreciated nor do I see it as something that ought to be admired as an intellectual achievement. To ask, then, what good is music or what purpose does music serve is too broad a question in my opinion and furthermore, I doubt that we have the conditions necessary for a proper understanding of what music can do and how it can be experienced. Please note that instead of saying that it is merely a matter of taste, I chose to write down a few of the artists who I appreciate because the have a repertoire of sounds that I find endearing.


what makes you think that i only appreciate music that i understand? also: what makes you think that for me intellectual achievements can't be appreciated unless they're understood? however you're right about one thing: i do think that music is an intellectual achievement.


brilliant corners is monk's most overrated song and album. or maybe i just don't understand it yet.

This statement appears to indicate that if you were to reach a deeper understanding of "Brilliant Corners" then and only then would an authentic level of appreciation be tenable. Although it was probably just a way of indicating reverence and a deep respect for the composer.

Or perhaps you meant to indicate your interest in achieving an accomplishment deemed "Brilliant" - staking out your own 'brilliant corner' - and having this be recognized by your peers and extended family. In which case, I say, composer, play on !


"reverence and respect" -- yes. that's a very good way to put it.

but there's also this: i remember once not liking jazz. then i learned a bit about the song structure, the idea of head/solo etc., and only then started to like it. -- and another way things can go is this: i like the music, but i understand nothing about it (an example in my case is arabic music, which i like: if there are structures there, i'm hardly aware of them, and perhaps i'd like it *less* if i did understand.) in "brilliant corners" i hear only a kind of math or maybe factory sounds, if you know what i mean. so i think that i must not get it (or else people who consider it his best work are drawn to a part of his music that *doesn't* strike me as it's best quality).


I think the role of the musical artist is such that he cannot be said to be fully aware of his greatness (i.e., genius). A musician needs listeners and interpreters that are as great as he or she is.

Wagner (Awe) vs. Stravinsky (Shock)