Hopefully my last post on this one....
>This is where you lose me, Todd, because I haven't suggested, nor do I think
>Mr. Anonymous suggested, that some external authority ought to shut anyone
>down.
Yes, perhaps "shut down" is too strongly worded, and I certainly don't
think anyone is suggesting an "external authority" should put bands out of
business (although it's an intriguing idea -- suckage police...) What I'm
reacting to, pretty simply, is the tone of some of these conversations --
the ire that is aimed at certain bands who are getting attention
(supposedly) at the expense of others. Direct it at the labels that sign
them, the programmers that play them, the consultants that push them, the
promoters that lump them together for alt.country showcases, etc.
I do think - and I'm speaking for myself, obviously, and not Mr.
>Anonymous, who may be making a different argument - that this is a fairly
>specific issue related to how these styles are perceived on first encounter.
>It's worth noting that the International Bluegrass Music Association's
>mission statement speaks explicitly about promoting higher standards of
>professionalism, and the phenomenon that we've been talking about is a big
>part of the reason why - not just with regard to the music itself, but with
>all aspects of the field, like sound reinforcement, recording quality, art
>work, venues, etc. - but the organization doesn't suggest kicking anybody
>out of the business <g>. I'll leave open the question of the extent to
>which those are issues relevant to alt.country.
True -- I suppose it's a bit different with bluegrass, where bands are so
clearly identified as being a part of a genre which has, as you point out,
an actual association involved with setting "standards" for the style and
festivals arranged around that style, etc.
