I suppose he just did not know the difference between Renaissance Medieval
and Baroque, so "large bygone centuries" would do..
Donatella
To: "Lex van Sante" <lvansa...@wanadoo.nl>; "lute mailing list list"
<lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>; "Mayes, Joseph" <ma...@rowan.edu>
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 4:51 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: review
I rather like this, and might take is as an autojustification, as it
implies that the past is still alive, at least in part.
RT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mayes, Joseph" <ma...@rowan.edu>
To: "Lex van Sante" <lvansa...@wanadoo.nl>; "lute mailing list list"
<lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 10:24 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: review
I once had a reviewer say that I played music from "largely bygone
centuries" any idea what that means?
JM
__________________________________________________________________
From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu on behalf of Lex van Sante
Sent: Mon 6/1/2009 9:12 AM
To: lute mailing list list
Subject: [LUTE] Re: review
Once a professional critic wrote about a recital of mine that my lute
sounded like a crackling painting. Untill now I still don't know what
substance he was on.xD
Op 1 jun 2009, om 14:57 heeft howard posner het volgende geschreven:
>
> On Jun 1, 2009, at 5:31 AM, Rob MacKillop wrote:
>
>> The guy is a native-English speaker, so has no excuse, and, no, I
>> have
>> no idea what he is talking about. Still, a review's a review!
>
> It has the virtue of being obviously obscure; you're not deluded by
> apparently clear writing into thinking it actually says anything
> worth knowing. I've been involved in writing and editing reviews of
> one sort or another (I'm doing both between reading and writing these
> posts) and I've seen lots of reviews that appear to be using plain
> English but consist entirely of throat-clearing, introductions of
> topics that aren't pursued, and characterizations that are meaningful
> only to the writer; at the end, there's no actual meaning.
>
> Here's a famous bit of critical drivel, from a 1979 review of Queen's
> Jazz album by a rock critic with a big reputation. The prose is
> fine, but when you've read it, try to relate it something in the real
> world. Does "fascist rock band" actually mean something? Or is the
> critic just suffering the effects of keen distaste mixed with drugs?
>
>> Whatever its claims, Queen isn't here just to entertain. This group
>> has come to make it clear exactly who is superior and who is
>> inferior. Its anthem, "We Will Rock You," is a marching order: you
>> will not rock us, we will rock you. Indeed, Queen may be the first
>> truly fascist rock band. The whole thing makes me wonder why anyone
>> would indulge these creeps and their polluting ideas.
>>
>>
>
> For context, you can read the whole rant at:
>
>
[1]http://www.rollingstone.com/artists/queen/albums/album/195592/review
/
> 5942056
> --
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1.
http://www.rollingstone.com/artists/queen/albums/album/195592/review/
2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
