Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Where is tomasino

My bad. I didn't know your examples were from a Piano World search. I thought they were found randomly on the web.

Here is my original comment which caused so much offense:


"Minnesota Public Radio has a little catch line they like to throw in during station breaks:

'Remember, all music was once new.'

Which is true, It's hard to disagree with that. And the implication, that we should give all new music a chance is something I also agree with--for awhile. But I won't listen endlessly in the spirit of tolerance. I won't necessarily listen until I am "used to it," and am on the edge of saying "I like it."

Endless listening and endless tolerance can lead to some strange conclusions. I imagine most of us could get used to the smell of our dirty socks piled up in the bottom of our bedroom closets. After while, if our mom comes in and throws the socks in the washer, we might be left feeling that we miss that smell. Indeed, we like it.

This little cameo of how we come to 'like' things can be applied to many issues of art and taste.

I've been trying for years to come up with a better way to validate artistic expression, but I haven't quite got it yet. But I do know that I'm very wary of getting used to something by endlessly and tolerantly listening it.

TomTomasino
aka
tomasino"



I've re-read my post above several times now, and it really seems to me one needs to be looking for offense to take offense. The comment contains a serious observation about how we might go astray in artistically validating new music. I accuse no one specifically of ill-considered choices in the music one chooses to like. It is simply an illustration, intended as a humorous one, of the process of how our tastes change. A similar illustration would be how our tastes change in automobile styles: Honda introduces little square cars, and many people dislike them. Soon those same people get used to it, at which point they're only one step away from saying they like those little square cars. Other examples: how did we learn to like olives, or whiskey or Limberger cheese, or how did Minnesota Norwegians ever come to like Lutefisk?--it's horrible. Now that last is humor too, and maybe if one is not from Minnesota, he or she won't quite get it. But if one takes offense at that, they're looking for it. As I wrote above, "I feel we all ought to be given the latitude necessary to express unconventional and difficult to articulate ideas without having to deal with those who are looking to take offense."

TomTomasino

Completely agree, Tomasino.

Anyone who would actually take offense to that isn't worth talking to.

Actually, 30 years after leaving Minnesota that still remains a mystery to me



Cathy

Here's the link to the entire thread in which your message is found - it is about two-thirds of the way in. Context is helpful.

If you have really have trouble understanding why people took exception to the implication that they acquired a taste in new music in a manner comparable to getting used to the smell of a pile of dirty socks, you (and others) might consider reading more of it than just your own message. Both Lemon Pledge and debrucey were quite clear about the issue.

Yes, I agree with you, context often makes a difference, and should always be considered. Thank you for providing it. But I don't see it makes much difference in this case.

Consider my post in the broader context you provide: It is a stand alone comment. It is not in response to a specific post in the thread or any thread, and it is directed and addressed to no one. The only relevant context, then, is the context that follows. You and several others provide the sole context. I wrote nothing further.

May I take it from your seeming hesitancy to address the comments I made concerning the tone and intent of my post, that you are conceding my main points?: that in response to a post such as mine, "one needs to be looking for offense to take offense," and that in general, "we all ought to be given the latitude necessary to express unconventional and difficult to articulate ideas without having to deal with those who are looking to take offense."

Tomasino

I didn't like what I read even without context. I doubt many of us live with our moms, so that whole idea was ridiculous.

It got worse with the implication that this 'little cameo' is how 'we' come to like things. Who's 'we'?

A question: can 'we' have multiple identities on this board at the same time, like tomasino and tomtomasino? That could be fun and interesting.

I found nothing offensive about tomasino's original post, even with the context provided. (Maybe it's because I share his opinion, and would've been even more strident in my comments. )

But aside from my own opinions, I read the post several times, and found it to be as innocuous as tomasino said: An isolated comment, directed at no one in particular. He seemed to be describing his own attempts at expanding his musical horizons, but I sensed absolutely no criticism of others who may enjoy the types of music he was having difficulty with.

Clearly this was a case of hypersensitivity on the part of certain members, a disease all too common in these forums. (Actually, ALL internet forums.)

'Clearly' this is a case of any number of people acting like their opinions are universal and unfallible, a very common 'disease'. Treating adults like children whose moms pickup their dirty socks is infantilizing and insulting to me.

He used 1st person plural pronouns, like "we" and "us", so I assumed he was not setting himself above anyone else, but was talking about people like himself, who may struggle to like something that others have deemed great or profound.

But I won't belabor the point. You're obviously sticking with "offensive", so I'm not likely to persuade you otherwise. So how would you classify this particular "offense", felony or misdemeanor? Might you settle for a simple "parking violation"?

I don't know... doesn't it feel insulting to someone who makes an effort to make a living from composing contemporary music to be compared to dirty socks!?!? Just sayin'

I don't think this is quite what he's saying.

I don't think he was saying that at all. He was using an analogy to describe the process of trying to like something through repetition that he simply can't learn to like. I probably wouldn't have used the "dirty sock" analogy myself, and maybe that's what's really irking people. If so, then maybe forgive him for a minor rhetorical faux pas rather than inferring insult?

Nikolas, aren't there forms of music, or musical genres that you simply can't gravitate to? Do you like American country and western, hip-hop, heavy metal, etc.? Do you love it all, or are there certain types of music where you say, "I simply don't 'get' it"?

Well, that's where I am when it comes to 20th century classical music. I simply don't "get it". Maybe I just have very plebeian, vulgar, pedestrian musical tastes, and if so, I'm fine with that. I'm perfectly willing to concede that the problem may be with me. But I also can't force myself to like something that I don't.

And that in no way means that I am disrespectful of those who write or perform contemporary music. I have nothing but admiration for anyone who can tackle the complexities of musical composition, whether I personally relate to it or not. I don't want to speak for tomasino, but I sense that he might have a similar opinion.

Oy. Is it really necessary to turn this into a thread about rehashing old grievances?

I'll say welcome back to tomasino too--I've enjoyed his posts, as well as those of Nikolas and many others.

Here's hoping things will lighten up. Sun has come out after rain here in Philly . . . and after all it's May.

Exactly.

Replace "the smell of dirt socks" with "the taste of avocados" and it suddenly doesn't seem so bad.

The way he uses the 1st person plural implies that those of us who do like the music that he doesn't like are somehow acclimatized to something distasteful and "dirty". Never once is there any suggestion that the "dirty sock" music might be actually be any good.

While we're pondering, let's listen to some 'dirty sock' music :

Harrison's Harrison's Clocks:
http://youtu.be/6sHPND4kJ10

Aha!!

It IS about
Folks, this is a tempest in a teapot. Please lighten up, and stop personalizing everything. Once in a while, it's not about you and your sensibilities. It's about taste. And every single one of us is entitled to our own taste.

Although I wouldn't put dirty socks in my soup or in any other food I eat, I didn't find his post insulting enough to re-pound on someone. If he already got pounded over his mentioning of dirty socks, continuous pounding on top of the initial pounding is unnecessary in my view.