Most Underrated, Forgotten, and Neglected Masterpieces

I can't believe that you are trying to defend a sentence with the phrases 'hep-cat' and 'en masse' in them. The only defence is insanity. Your exclamation mark is a mid sentence exclamation mark, it only seems like two sentences because of the shock of reading the phrase 'hep-cat' and the dramatic pause needed to get over this shock.

You Green Eco PC liberals are all the same, always trying to attach labels to people. First Wagner gets a rough ride for 'supposedly' being a jew hating nazi (of course he was nothing of the sort) and now you pick on poor bespectacled Shosti for being politically naive. He's an artist, all artists are politically naive. He was a qualified referee troyboy, I bet you don't even know the offside rule.

Hugh, my use of the term 'hep cat' was developing your use of the term 'hep'. The fact that both phrases are in inverted commas is a reference to the fact that both are outmoded now are what might be termed retro.

Now stop shooting from the hep. I mean hip.

The only defence is insanity? What does that make someone who changes persona more times than the headlines are repeated per hour on Sky news then? And who talks to us one week as a Devon farmer and the next as a Rastafarian?

On your ward it should be 'who are we today?' and not 'how are we today?'

No Vic, I have read Parla's posts very carefully, perhaps rather more so than it seems you read mine.

You state:

"Greatness in music is a matter of opinion.   What constitutes knowledge is not."

As I wrote, carefully, in my post, I know of no logical reason for making this distinction.  If you think that the distinction can be made, the onus is on you to prove it.  It is not something that you can state as a 'given'.  There is an extensive philosophy literature on this subject. You are entitled to your opinion but what is not reasonable is to label the opposing opinion logically absurd.

Your next point is the 'big' one.  

"Parla argues that music (but only classical music)  achieves its status (ie "great", "brilliant", etc) in the same way that the knowledge of objective reality achieves its status as truth.   Thus he claims that when he uses the word "brilliant" in relation to a piece of music it is a fact not an opinion.   And you think that is not absurd?"

I don't think it's absurd though I don't agree entirely.  But I think it is eminently worthwhile discussing carefully and as rationally as we are able.  I will submit my thoughts on this shortly in a separate post.  But, again, I would remind you that this subject has an extensive literature in both musical and philosophical works so it would be arrogant of any of us to assume we will resolve it finally within this forum!

Next up, classical music as proof of the existence of God.  Again, this argument is by no means uniquely Parla's. Nor is it restricted to classical music. There are many intelligent people who hold that the complexity and beauty of the world around us requires the intervention of a 'divine hand'.  You may find it logically absurd (and you are in good company - you obviously have read Richard Dawkins's 'The God Delusion. But yours (and Dawkins') is only one view and one that would offend (has offended in Dawkins' case) many others. I hasten to add I am not a believer myself so if you find bias in my view it does not stem from religious beliefs.

OK, Parla's claim that record companies deliberately produce inferior discs of their reissued catalogue is not valid. However, I do think that on the larger issue that he was addressing, there has been a serious general decline in production standards (not of the discs themselves).  I'd argue it's even worse than Parla argues and has spread to all the major companies. Fortunately there are some honourable exceptions.

I fully understand when you say Parla's style grates sometimes.  We are probably all guilty of this.  I am very aware thar my own posts sometimes do not 'read' as they seemed to when I wrote them.  But I repeat please; the posts not the posters.  There is some splendid material for discussion here.

Small point, but it was Dumas himself who turned his novel into a play, and a performance of this play that lead to 'La Traviata'. The book has a better, less sloppy ending, but it is a Mills and Boon book, albeit a very fine Mills and Boon book. But then La Traviata is a 'Chick Flick'.

If one person argues that Bach is a greater composer than Beethoven and another disagrees, there can be no appeal to an objective reality to establish one right and the other wrong.  It is in the subjective realm of opinion.  There can be no resolution.   If one person argues that E=mc squared (can't do the subscript), and another disagrees, one can be proved right and the other wrong.  That is the distinction.  There is knowledge and there is opinion.  The fact that the latter requires the former does not imply that they are synonymous - unless, of course you claim, as Parla does in this area, that your opinion constitutes knowledge. 

And you don't think that claim absurd?

We used to think placating the gods necessary for a good harvest.   "Many intelligent people" can "hold" any view they like.  The difference between faith and knowledge lies in the realm of evidence.  The existence of complexity and beauty is "evidence" of nothing.

"Not valid" could be a kind euphemism for absurd.  Whether is was made in the general context of declining standards or not, it is invalid and the "evidence" used to support it ridiculous.  Read the claim and his evidence for it again if you are in doubt. 

There is indeed, and I look forward to its continuation.

Vic.

Vic wrote:

"We used to think placating the gods necessary for a good harvest.   "Many intelligent people" can "hold" any view they like.  The difference between faith and knowledge lies in the realm of evidence.  The existence of complexity and beauty is "evidence" of nothing."

Well, at least we establish that your criticism is not only of Parla but of "many intelligent people". perhaps that might give pause for thought.

As for the possibility of objective verification, Hugh has just answered you (correctly in my view, thank you Hugh).  You could try reading 'The Logic of Scientific Discovery' by Karl Popper.  

That is one side, the other is whether specifically an objective evaluation of the quality of music is possible.  You posit that it is not.  But your view is by no means universally accepted, and as before, denying it leads to some uncomfortable conclusions. Just give me a couple of days and as I promised before I will try my best to address this question (unless you'd prefer not!). As I've said this is a 'big' subject.  I'm writing now in between other tasks and need a couple of hours for clear thinking!

Parla's post on destructible CDs is best forgotten but trivial: come on please, it can't be used indefinitely as evidence against his views on any or all other topics. Surely you can do better than that!