Being unnecessarily combative, hostile or otherwise violating etiquette can result in social sanctions, which is a fancy way of saying "people will think you're a jerk", or "people might get upset at you for causing derails".
It's extremely relevant when we're talking about the "allowability" and "acceptability" of equally valid subjective responses. It's not a "derailing" just because it gives you the urge to pull out Emily Post.
"Deserve" or "earning" is a value statement and I kind of think statements like that just boil down to "this is popular but I think it's bad". I don't think it's possible to ask if a work "deserves" to be popular without bringing questions of aesthetic taste into it.
A discussion forum consists of social interaction. When talking with other people there are going to be behaviors that tend to give people a positive impression of you, or a negative one. There are also going to be behaviors that are conductive to good discussion, and ones that are conductive to toxic, hostile discussion.
I'll just repeat what I typed above:
You're well-informed about music, fair minded and you seem to be an objective observer. Can you tell us what you've learned in here?
I don't sense hostility from anyone advocating any kind of music. Or from someone who says they can't stand Baroque music. I may not agree, but I don't consider it hostile. On the other hand I've seen threads in which attacking John Cage and his work was taken as a personal insult to Cage fans. It's puzzling.
Right, it does bring in questions of aesthetic taste, but I don't see the issue with that. These tastes are based on standards, & whether one aesthetic standard is better than another is a subjective matter, but it doesn't mean that all works will meet a particular aesthetic standard equally well. Some might be better at accomplishing a specific goal. That's why I tacked on that works of art can be better "in some respects", not better in every way.
What always strikes me about your posts is how differently you seem to consume music than the way I do. I've never been one to dive into scores, get into theoretical analysis, or really try to figure out how a piece works, but it clearly gives you a lot of joy to do that.
IMO it is not rude or disrespectful to state a negative opinion about music or composer that I may admire, e.g. "I cannot tolerate the music of John Cage.". To each his own. But to instead say, e.g., that John Cage is a charlatan is what I would consider rude and disrespectful to all those members who have expressed admiration for his work.
If someone says "people who hate composer x are deaf/soulless/have bad taste/whatever", I'd consider that at least a bit hostile, depending on the tone of the post.
I'm neutral on Cage's body of work but I do think he was sincere in his outlook and what he wanted to accomplish. If someone thinks he was a charlatan or that at the least he wasn't very talented musically, what's that to you if you love Cage? It's not an insult directed at you.
But you, having security in your own tastes and the knowledge that that's just another subjective opinion, just brush it off. Right? Btw I've not heard anyone called "soulless or deaf" here, and "bad taste" is yet another subjective judgement.fbjim said:
I'm not concerned about my feelings being hurt here. I'm concerned about this being a net negative when it comes to discussing music.
How is that any different from being told that I love Bach because of the influence of the "received wisdom"?
I won't assume that you have no basis for thinking that there's a double standard, but to be fair to fans of John Cage & other avante-garde fans, they most likely hear people disparage their preferences way more often than fans of baroque. Perhaps not in the TalkClassical forums where people are more welcoming, but in most other spaces. I can see why they'd be less patient.
This is a tricky one to navigate. Modern music fans have a right to feel insulted when people imply they're being fooled or pretending, but the issue is the "emperor's new clothes" sentiment pops up so often that, while I'm not condoning it, modern music fans should by now expect those kinds of comments & not take them too personally. It comes with the territory.
Stravinsky and his admirers were probably called all sorts of terrible things in his day. So was Wagner and Beethoven. Big deal.
But that's just it. If you really and truly feel that it all comes down to completely subjective individual opinions, then it doesn't matter. All you can say is "well, I don't know for sure. Maybe I am being fooled, but I like this stuff anyway".
Unfortunately, his main message is not making the implied point above. It is aimed particularly at Mozart and the like with terms such as idolatry and quotes such as ‘creaminess’ and ‘sugary sweet’ from various people, one of which has declared the baroque and classical era ‘lame’. It strikes me that, ironically, to find profound discussions of CM, one will have to look elsewhere than in a thread on ‘Profundity’.
