Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

For TD

Expand Messages
  • Gerald Eskelin
    ... Thanks, Johnny. Your plaudits are greatly appreciated--especially when I m feeling a bit like I ve intruded into a domain where my concerns may not be
    Message 1 of 3 , Mar 1, 2000
      Johnny Reinhard posted:
      > Since I can tell that both Paul and Jerry are trying to work out difficult
      > communications, I applaud their efforts.

      Thanks, Johnny. Your plaudits are greatly appreciated--especially when I'm
      feeling a bit like I've intruded into a domain where my concerns may not be
      widely shared.

      > It can be grueling and unpleasant
      > for all who are reading, but such is to be expected in a difficult
      > examination - over the Internet frontier.

      Can you believe what is happening here? People from every corner of the
      globe are getting together nearly every day to discuss matters of mutual
      concern. Mind blowing!!!!!!

      It is really interesting to me that the question I have raised here has
      become the "Paul and Jerry Show." While Paul has at times appeared abrasive
      to some (including me, at times), he always accepts the criticism he
      provokes and goes on in a positive manner to discuss the issues as he sees
      them. I have learned to appreciate that trait and value his straightforward
      manner. While John Link is primarily responsible for my being here, and he
      and others have helped immensely to get me "up to speed" and into the
      conversation, it is Paul who has kept my own thinking from wandering into
      the fantasy of predetermined conclusions. Do you realize how valuable that
      is? I do, and I feel fortunate to be able to benefit from Paul's interest in
      exploring the "high third."

      > Academia all too often ignores
      > anything that might be a challenge to orthodoxy, and that has proved a
      > serious problem to research and understanding.

      Tell me about it! I get letters of praise and thankful appreciation
      regarding my book "The Sounds of Music: Perception and Notation" from the
      same college teachers who will not adopt it as a text because it is "out of
      step" with tradition. How frustrating!
      > That's what I like about this list. As we get to know each other, we
      > recognize each other as people who are informed and who mean well, with
      > faces! Different things will piss us off, for example style differences,
      > bias, passion (from none to overwrought), excessive verbiage, even
      > geographical location. But let's wake up and smell the coffee. People still
      > argue about whether the Holocaust ever took place, and yet we poured over
      > Werckmeister's position on ET during the last year's of his life with as much
      > scrutiny as we could muster. (Soon there will be more to add.)
      > Unfortunately, this list reflects the political climate in the U.S. and we're
      > in an extremely contested primary race. Why wouldn't we reflect our times
      > similarly to Bach and Handel in their own.
      > On another tack, we have different religions, so should we fight about it?
      > How about the significance of the existence question for a supreme sentient
      > being? For Werckmeister it was significant. Clearly, we each have our
      > biases towards specific tunings, and conversely against others.
      > Frankly, I was very disturbed by some of the responses posts issued by people
      > who one hoped would be more tolerant of difference. Ironically, we have each
      > found ourselves on the fringe of the mainstream because of our prominent
      > interest in tuning matters. It is the relentless search for understanding
      > that Paul and Jerry are trying to achieve which I find most gratifying.
      > Passionate discussions evidently require delicate handling over the Internet.

      What is _really_ happening now (in case it hasn't been noticed) is that Paul
      and I have worked through most of our misconceptions about what the other is
      saying and have postured more as working together toward a common goal. This
      is not to say we won't continue to hammer out apparent differences or
      miscommunications. That's the way (if some haven't realized it yet) to
      _really_ get along. Just ask my wife of 46 years.

      Johnny, your post is most timely and I'm sure the members will take it to
      heart. By the way, what does "For TD" mean?

    • Afmmjr@aol.com
      TD is for Tuning Digest. For some reason I had difficulty sending the original message. Digest subscribers do not receive attachments and for some reason,
      Message 2 of 3 , Mar 1, 2000
        TD is for Tuning Digest. For some reason I had difficulty sending the
        original message. Digest subscribers do not receive attachments and for some
        reason, when I tried forwarding the message, AOL turned it into an attachment.

        Several has asked me to try again and though finally successful, it is a few
        days late to the original post which apparently appeared blank to digesters.

        Johnny Reinhard
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.