JSngry

But what mattered was not the strength by which they were held...but the logic, the reason, how far they accorded with what was (is) accepted as human morality (which I realise is a whole can of worms in itself). Logic and reason have very little to do with it, in the end. What really matters, what really gets things done, is how well the people with the strong opinions are able to convince those without them. All the more reason to encourage self-examination and the developing of character based on same. People need to know who and what they are for themselves instead of just having their identity fed to them by various entities, few of whom are benevolent in intent. Should there be the willingness to speak up and maybe a little too loudly in the process, it's hopefully a growing pain. Whether it actually is or not, time will tell. Waiting on time to make that decision is a pain in the butt, but what's the alternative?

Other than what's written on the score, it's pretty much all subjective. I've no real problems with "strong opinions" as long as within the expression thereof there is at least an occasional glimpse of a realization that opinions is indeed what they are. It's the people who really do believe that they are absolute fact that I'll get away from at the earliest opportunity. otoh, people who delineate a "this is what I believe and this is why I believe it" POV with passion and clarity, them I will develop a respect for, even if I disagree with them completely and irrevocably, like the guy who spen almost an hour in a bar one night trying to convince me, somewhat aggressively, that Oscar Peterson was"greater" than Bud Powell because OP had a clarity of purpose & consistency of execution that Bud was rarely able to muster. I mean, on the one hand, I thought/knew that this guy was a fool, bit otoh, hey, he knew what mattered to him, knew who he was, had obviously thought this out on a personal level, so was he really a fool, or was he jsut wrong about this one thing? And I'm sure he was thinking the same about me.

Yes, if you can establish what your criteria for being a "good composer" entail, why these are your criteria, and if you can show how Verdi's music fails those criteria. Doing show demonstrates that you have indeed tackled the issue head-on, thought them through, and made actual evaluations and not just had a gut-level vomit and let it go at that. Of course, Verdi is actually irrelevant here. He did what he did, he's dead, and that's that. But you're not, and if you choose to engage that music (or have it forced upon you with no way out, as many of us have had it), the relevant issue is how do you deal with it then? Character is not inherited, nor is it to be assumed. It is of necessity developed, and those who fail to develop it for themselves yet claim to possess it are crude charlatans who present themselves as having something of which they have no knowledge.

The Ku Klux Klan do indeed have strong opinions. So did Ghandi. So do I. So, apparently, do you.

I don't know that we should, at least not completely. I tend to...appreciate people with strong principles who will not be moved unless and until they can be shown that it is folly not to. So many people are so damn weak-willed, just go along with whatever seems right at the time, that they really have no core. I've come to respect core. Which is not to say that core cannot be deadly or dangerous or simply folly. Of course it can, and it often is. But when I ask myself who the more foolish person is, the person who has a core that has become hardened to any further evolving or the person who has never had any, I tend to believe that it's the latter. There's just something about people who for whatever reason fail to...define themselves that really bugs me. "Define" is not exactly the right word, but... I guess I'd rather live in a difficult world full of prickly personalities who know who they are battling it out than I would a quiet world full of people who just muddle around indifferently. The best of both worlds would be even better still, but at best that's something we're still evolving towards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_El2_enNFaI

What OS are you using? My download speed improved markedly when I changed to Windows 7.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-86NkXX46kc

Define "rarely".

I actually prefer diet sodas, and have ever since they stopped using saccharin. For the most part, the sweet ones leave a sticky residue that is quite bothersome to my peace of mind. OTOH, Dublin Dr. Pepper & the various "throwback" formulas use the cane sugar, and that's a little better. And that Frosty cherry limeade is the nectar of the gods, especially when pulled out of a cooler full of ice after having sat there for several hours.

Or maybe people who actually accomplish things in their field do so after subjecting themselves to rigorous self-interrogations about what matters & why, as well as what doesn't matter & why. It's that deeply-developed personal sense of "right and wrong" in their art that allows them to create something in their own distinct voice. When one has clearly developed lines about what should be what, lines that they can personally justify, then their agitation about certain things can be understood in terms of articulating a personal "artistic morality" that is demonstrated in their own work. In other words, they can talk the talk and walk the walk. Doesn't mean that they're correct in an absolute sense, of course, but it does mean that if they've found and created worthwhile using their particular esthetic, then it's probably worth noting what is is about some other things that rub them the wrong way. For instance, there's no doubt that bebop was at once a radical revolt against and a continuation of certain elements of the then-prevailing "jazz esthetic". It's one thing to recognize the "moldy fig" element as being just that, but it's quite another to dismiss all rejections of the change to be just that, if for no other reason than the what-you-would-think-would-be-obvious principle that evolution actually involves real change. Some things so get left behind, discarded, just as other things get retained, and still others stay on, but in altered forms. Then again, what Philip Larkin has to say about bebop and beyond is probably about as relevant to me as what I have to say about, for instance, Hatfield and The North or Matching Mole is to you, and that is probably how it should be, ya' know?

Yeah, a few weeks ago I was debating whether or not to buy tix for the Cle@Tex weekend series in early August. Starting to look like it might be a thing to do.

Commercial, yes, but misguided...maybe not. IIRC, Fathead was living in the area at the time, this was his local band, and they played what was being played a lot in South Dallas, they be representin', to use the vernacular. It's definitely got that thing. What it has beyond that, hey, maybe not much, but in this case, given the whos and the whens, I'm ok with that.

I take it, then, that Larkin knows about a demon lover at midnight calling for his mate?

We need it right now...I already hear the Phils going to the broom closet... No room for mistakes when Cliff Lee shows this form, and Colby made two. Lee made none, and there you have it. C'mon Giants, c'mon Braves. Hell, c'mon Monday.

Yeah, you guys keep handling those A's, please! And Braves, y'all gotta do better in Anaheim. C'mon now! Signed, Desperate in Dallas

Glass bottles, that's the way to go.

I'm thinking that if erections triggered bowel movements, Viagra would put Ex-Lax out of business. But they don't, so here we are.

The Seven Dwarfs The Three Little Pigs Tom Thumb