Errors-To: et-admin at blackcat dot demon dot co dot uk Reply-To: et at cs dot man dot ac dot uk Sender: et at cs dot man dot ac dot uk Precedence: bulk From: et at cs dot man dot ac dot uk To: et at cs dot man dot ac dot uk Subject: Elephant Talk Digest #344 E L E P H A N T T A L K The Internet newsletter for Robert Fripp and King Crimson enthusiasts Number 344 Tuesday, 11 February 1997 SPECIAL ISSUE Replies from ETers to Robert Fripp's post in ET#328 (part nine) ------------------ A D M I N I S T R I V I A --------------------- POSTS: Please send all posts to et at cs dot man dot ac dot uk TO UNSUBCRIBE, OR TO CHANGE ADDRESS: Send a message with a body of HELP to et-admin at blackcat dot demon dot co dot uk, or use the DIY list machine at http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/aig/staff/toby/et/list/ ETWEB: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/aig/staff/toby/et/ (partial mirror at http://members.aol.com/etmirror/) THE ET TEAM: Toby Howard (Moderator), Dan Kirkdorffer (Webmeister) Mike Dickson (List Admin), and a cast of thousands. The views expressed herein are those of the individual authors. ET is produced using John Relph's Digest 3.0 package. ------------------ A I V I R T S I N I M D A --------------------- Date: 28 Jan 97 16:16:11 EST From: "Michael K. Sheehan" <103734 dot 3601 at compuserve dot com> Subject: reply to Robert's questions Dear Robert, Many have responded to your challenging questions and I confess I stilled an initial urge to respond, as I wanted to see what some others had to say--to help clarify my own point of view. Herewith my responses: i) What is the nature of the relationship between the audience / enthusiast/ fan and the musician? a) I side with those who believe the answer varies from musician to musician,from audience to audience, and that audience, enthusiast and fan can be held to be three distinct types of entities. The audience is not necessarily comprised of enthusiasts nor fans--indeed, neither may be present and the audience may exist at any or all points along the enthusiastic<----->unenthusiastic axis. The enthusiast in my definition ratifies the musician's election to perform, responding with an appropriate level of gusto, restraint or honest, constructive criticism and perhaps evangelising a bit on the musician's behalf. The fan is another creature altogether and perhaps seeks the reverse--seeks the musician's ratification of himself in some way. As to the nature of the relationship, it will vary with the audience and the balance of punters/enthusaists/fans contained therein. Ideally, the relationship is one similar to a sacrament, as an earlier respondent so eloquently compared it. The actual practices surrounding the sacrament may vary--viz., a Grateful Dead audience and a Crim audience vs. a Gospel revival and a Latin Mass--but the end, the partaking of the gift of music, is much the same. ii) What are the rights of the audience / enthusiast / fan? a) I believe "honesty" is the topic which keeps cropping up in response to this question and it was the first concept which occurred to me as well. I don't believe we're "owed" anything more than the best music the musician is fit to perform--mentally, physically, spiritually. iii) What are the responsibilities and obligations of the audience /enthusiast / fan? a) The audience has an obligation to be an audience. The enthusiast has a greater responsibility, and that is to be as honest toward the musician as the musician is toward the audience. This is sometimes difficult. The fan has an absolute obligation to restrain himself, and this is least often met. iv) What do you personally, as an audient / enthusiast / fan expect of your artists? In the words of a great thinker, I ask artists, as I ask anyone, to "act with courtesy. Otherwise, be polite." Further, though, I ask compassion. In my youth I was often a starstruck, stammering,sphincter-winkingly nervous, sweating little turd in the presence of one of my musical idols. I would try to be polite and say hello and whatnot, and some would ignore me, others would patronise, and still others would--as I see in retrospect--be compassionate, saying to themselves, no doubt, "what ho, this poor nervous little turd has got himself all worked up. It scarcely matters why--a kind word or two will make his day." My own opinion is that on this ball of blue-speckled mud nothing takes the place of compassion. Which is not to say that I (or anyone I know!) practices compassion as they should, as a constant guiding principal, but that does not mean that they shouldn't. These days I let the poor bastard musicians alone. On three separate occasions now, you, Mr. Fripp, whom I'd love to have a coffee with, have walked right past me without being accosted. I reckon Tony probably makes superior coffee, anyway. :) v) What do you personally, as a KC-RF audient / enthusiast / fan expect of Robert Fripp? Honesty and diligence and craft. As well as the above. My questions for Robert: What is your aim? What do you expect of me, personally? Can you define fan/enthusiast/audience for us? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:52:25 -0500 (EST) From: skantere Subject: Answers to RF Dear Robert, It was a pleasure to try and answer your questions. It helped me very much to crystallize my feelings on these matters. I hope the obvious deficiencies of my English haven't prevented me from expressing what I wanted more or less adequately. ====================================================================== > i) What is the nature of the relationship between the audience / > enthusiast / fan and the musician? First of all, for me this relationship is inherently impersonal. It's not that the personality of a musician that I'm an enthusiast of does not interest me. It's that any personal information or attitude I may have, does not in any way affect the relationship in question. In this context, for me it's largely a relationship between myself and the *music*, not the *musician*, and is very similar to a relationship between myself and any other phenomenon of nature (and the outside world in general), that I'm exposed to. One having strong impact on me, that is. Please mind that not being a musician, I could only attempt a one-sided analysis of this relationship. I have many friends though who are (IMHO) very good musicians and have great respect for you. Most of them have only very basic English and are deprived of Internet, but I'll try to get them to answer as well. The perspective of a musician from a different culture (Russian) may be of some in interest to you, I hope. Oh yes, the financial aspect does of course exist but is too dull to discuss at length. Also, there are so many middlemen in between, that it's probably more appropriate to talk about financial relationship between a musician and the music industry on the one hand and the music industry and an auditorium on the other. I can only say that: a) entities like DGM that radically shorten this path are very welcome; b) the fact that one faithfully pays for records/videos/tickets does not give him any additional rights. > ii) What are the rights of the audience / enthusiast / fan? IMO, there's only one basic right and privilege: to profoundly appreciate the music. > iii) What are the responsibilities and obligations of the audience / > enthusiast / fan? Along the same lines, there's only one responsibility: to appreciate the music. In the live setting, if one feels that for any reason he does not profoundly appreciate the music, he must go away immediately for the sake of others. If everyone behaved like that, the magic of a live concert would have worked *way* more efficiently. If one properly listens and enjoys the music, he will never distract me, even if he dances right in front. I can (even!) stand a loud expression, even during the quiet part, if it comes straight from the heart. Such noises are induced by the music, and therefore largely become part of it. For me, the auditorium noise is an integral part of a live recording, and shouldn't be mixed too low (well, everything has to be done intelligently). Why does someone who's not getting it, ruin it for the others? I can only describe my own feelings. When I properly listen to the music, I feel like music-is-me. This of course is an illusion, like a water might think it's a wave or an air might think it's a wind. But this illusion tells us something. It tells me that in these moments I become a *medium* for the music. So, same as like bad acoustics or thin air negatively affect music in the physical sense, the part of the auditorium that fails to serve as a medium for the music, affects it negatively in a metaphysical sense, if you like; and this effect is far more devastating than that of bad acoustics. This may well be applicable on a much larger scale as well; that is, someone totally unfamiliar to me in the far (from me) corner of the world, who at this moment listens to King Crimson just because he's too shy to ask to turn it off, may negatively affect my own perception and vice versa. Anyone vaguely familiar with transpersonal psychology, or, say, works of Rupert Sheldrake, won't laugh reading this. One interesting side-thought is that the media inevitably affects the subject it contains and conveys in more subtle ways than just ruin or not ruin, but this can take me too far :) > iv) What do you personally, as an audient / enthusiast / fan expect of > your artists? Personally, I think it doesn't make sense to expect anything of anything; when one expects, he effectively substitutes the indefinitely rich and multi-faceted and meaningful Life with miserable and meaningless (in comparison) productions of his mind. I admit that despite this belief I unfortunately cannot get rid of all the expectations in all occasions; but speaking of music I dare say I can. > v) What do you personally, as a KC-RF audient / enthusiast / fan expect > of Robert Fripp? Actually your (and other real) music is the best illustration to the above. When I listen to a King Crimson recording that I heard one thousand times before, I should know precisely what to expect; yet I'm almost always genuinely surprised and amused, and sometimes scared like I don't know what. (When I'm not, I know it's *my* fault.) On the other hand, some previously unheard music, advertised to me by others sufficiently to breed the highest expectations, may sound to me almost as familiar and annoying as my alarm clock going off at 5 a.m. I'd rather talk of faith based on previous experience, than of expectations. ========================================================================= I just wanted to add that despite the impersonal nature of the relationship between me and you (as a musician), each of your postings fills me with joy. I just hope that your discipline, and its part that obliges you to read ALL our opuses, won't delay the next King Crimson release beyond the year 2000. I hope that after the flood you could share with us your own opinions on these matters. And also ... since at the moment you're reading and not (?!) listening to Vernon Reid ... may I ... thank you for everything. My very best to you and yours, including other band members, and anyone you love and respect. Sincerely, Sergei Kantere Moscow, Russia ------------------------------ From: gvacano at beaver dot mbb dot wesleyan dot edu (Guido Vacano) Subject: For Robert Fripp and audience Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:14:00 -0500 (EST) Hello-- I really enjoyed Robert Fripp's response to Matt Lincoln, regarding their encounter at the Vernon Reid show (Elephant Talk vol. 332). Some of RF's "fans" certainly needed to be informed that he is a human being, with all the attendant feelings, motivations, etc., and that he might actually rather watch Vernon Reid's show than deal with fanboy adulation. Clearly, he is not a smiling, music-playing automaton. This is not a situation where you dump money into the Fripp Machine, and the FM does exactly what you, the fanboy, wants. The fact that he really is a thinking human being should cause some dismay among the ranks of ET subscribers, many of whom, as evidenced by past posts, would be happier with the automaton. These are my answers to RF's questions (Elephant Talk vol. 228)-- i) What is the nature of the relationship between the audience / enthusiast / fan and the musician? The musician creates music, and performs it, by various means, before an audience. The individuals that comprise the audience choose to listen or not listen. If they value the musician's efforts, they continue to listen, and they pay the musician, enabling his/her continuation as a musician. I think a different relationship, of a very spiritual, individual nature, may be established between the musician and the listener. Describing this relationship in words is beyond me. ii) What are the rights of the audience / enthusiast / fan? The audience has no rights. iii) What are the responsibilities and obligations of the audience / enthusiast / fan? The only responsibility is that the enthusiast should not interfere in the relationship between the musician and other enthusiasts (i.e., do not behave like an ass at public performances, etc.) iv) What do you personally, as an audient / enthusiast / fan expect of your artists? I don't expect anything of artists. I simply appreciate their work as long as it appeals to me, and I try to understand it more fully when it does not appeal to me. One may learn from artists. v) What do you personally, as a KC-RF audient / enthusiast / fan expect of Robert Fripp? I do not expect anything of Robert Fripp. I hope, however, that he will never be bound by expectations, and that he will continue to be a human being and an artist, and not an automaton. Dr. Guido N. Vacano Lebman Lab Dept. of Microbiology and Immunology Virginia Commonwealth University -- If nothing is done, then all will be well. -- Lao Tse ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:47:55 -0500 (EST) From: Gregory Faiers Subject: RF Questions Hello. The recent debate regarding the "rights" and "obligations" of musicians and fans has brought up some things which I feel compelled to comment on. 1)It appears to me that some sort of "hero-worshipping" underlies much of this intense desire on the part of some individuals to meet and interact with musicians such as Mr. Fripp. I thought that the RF post regarding HIS state of mind at the time of the Matt Lincoln encounter was very revealing of this collision of worlds which occurs when "fan" meets "hero." I, for one, am grateful that I don't have to endure the loss of privacy and the restrictions which fame presents. I think that if we view this relationship between artist and enthusiast as a RELATIONSHIP (a good relationship requires work and a willingness to consider the feelings of others), then both the artist and the enthusiast will have a better understanding of one another. This immediate, knee-jerk reaction to an artists desire to retain their RIGHT of privacy is not well founded. 2)When it comes to the rights of the audience.....there is an old saying "You pay your money and you takes your chances." If I plunk down $$ for a concert, I have expectations, or else I wouldn't be there. However, I am putting down $$ for a performance which is put on by human beings. Human beings have problems, bad days, good days...sometimes the chemistry isn't right...sometimes it is. If I catch a band on a good night, I have been blessed. If not, well, so be it. BUT, 3)We do have the right to spend our time and money as we see fit. If an artist does not live up to our expectations, we have the right to deny that artist of our support ($$ and otherwise). For example, I have the right not to buy the next Matt Lincoln CD. You cannot have rights without responsibilities. From what I have seen in most of the postings prior to Mr. Fripp's questionairre, these "Fripp's tude" posts tend to have reflected only the perceived responsibilities of Mr. Fripp. Let's hope that the tide has turned and that the rights and responsibilities of the fan/enthusiast gets more thoroughly explored now. Greg Faiers ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:56:14 -0500 From: Ears Hart Subject: an opposing view (if permissible here) i appreciate this forum for discourse. i am re-posting this letter, at ET's request, as an ASCII file. it has been appx. ten days since the initial posting, and hence, i have had the occasion to read a sampling of others' responses to mr. fripp's questions re: fan/artist relations, etc. i hope that an opposing view may be included on a net-site designed to sing praises, more often than not. "i wish to respond to mr. fripp's queries (#3; i-v) posted in reaction to an ardent fan's perception that mr. fripp, in pursuit of his aim, invalidated his very existence. i want to make it clear that this document is not a parody of mr. fripp's use of the English language.=20 it's how i talk. *----------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----------------- indeed, the relationship between artist and art-recipient can be most perplexing. during the 23 years that I have been performing music for 'audients', numerous peculiar, troubling, often delightful "acquaintances" have occured because a listener/viewer felt a need to communicate with me, for some reason, about my art. often, i have been busy, distracted, or en route elsewhere when these persons initiated their communications. on at least one occasion, the physical appearance (which, then, met my criteria for "unstable/spooky") of the approacher disinclined me to receive them. i kept the interaction brief. working in many media, as i do, increases the quantity and type of person in receivership of my art. for this, i am thankful (we all know about that 'gift horse'...who cares if the molars are bad?). possibility has bloomed where i least expected it, and i've enjoyed others having understood and appreciated things which i worked very hard to bring to fruition. a singer/songwriter friend of mine once shared misgivings about an "inability" to relate with his listeners. he claims not to have been born with "The Social Gland", and feels uncomfortable when approached by strangers at his gigs. having participated in numerous musical collaborations with him, i have had the repeated opportunity to observe his socio-artistic interactions with objectivity. i explained that, to the mildly-perceptive observer, he communicates the following through his actions/human conduct at performances: "Get out of my way, insect! No time to talk. I'm here to entertain you." it occured to me that synchronous positive events are somehow in conflict with one another during the public marketing of his music: a. a receptive public, brings interest, enthusiasm, and their diverse and multifariously-bedecked personalities to his gig...THIS IS A CONSCIOUS CHOICE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE WORK / EXPENSE OF RECEIVING ANOTHER'S ART. It is either a gift, or stupidity. b. when a committed artist brings and attempts to deliver her/his interests/enthusiasms/ personality to that public in the form of live music...THE ARTIST HAS MADE THE CONSCIOUS CHOICE TO PROMOTE/MARKET/PROMULGATE THEIR ART AS PRODUCT* (re; corn chips) TO A PAYING PUBLIC. at this point in the relationship, we may begins to answer mr. fripp's questions to his buying public. Q's: "What is the nature of the relationship between audience/enthusiast/fan (a/e/f) and the musician? What are the responsibilities and obligations of the a/e/f?" An answer: the nature of the relationship is based upon everything Life on Earth, common sense, compassion, and responsible living would most immediately suggest to either choice-maker, having made one of the conscious choices identified above. the a/e/f is responsible for treating the artist with the respect accorded any living thing. the artist is responsible for treating the a/e/f with the respect any person engaged in commerce should have for their meal-ticket, never with contempt. no argument allowed on this. this validates, for the a/e/f , their purchasing choices, and increases the likelihood of future interaction with the artist's business. if the artist/musician is sharing the art they create with the public, and only(*again) through cash transactions (as does mr. fripp), then the artist accepts this arrangement, having created and participated in it.=20 if it is one's aim to sell, then that which relates to one's selling must, necessarily, become the hat on the head of the pantheon of activity leading to/proceeding from that process. these are the imperative considerations which place occasional** sandwiches in the hands of artists. this answer cannot begin to anticipate potential variants to the equation...i clearly remember the day john lennon signed an autograph for a dangerous, unstable fan....frank zappa was thrown off a stage by an irate audience member and required hospitalization...The United States of Arthur's precious eyeball mask was stolen by a "fan" during a Residents concert...bill laswell is reputed to carry, and brandish often, a handgun....in 1978, an overzealous "fan" gave me the crabs...and so forth. one can only speculate whether there might be some lone Guitar Craft graduate out there who holds mr. fripp personally responsible for the lack of (anticipated) commercial recognition received, following from their 'creative-association'. =20 if mr. fripp's reaction to the approaching fan was based upon fear, it is unfortunate that he took himself, and was unmindful in an environment, where danger could gain access to his life. * the conscious choice of not participating in commercial art...and devoting that time spent selling to further exploration of the muse, is always available. in so doing, the entire concept of "pesky audience" evaporates and whistles out the window. ** relative abundance, coupled with perceived sense of buyer-inattention, has been shown to shift the minds of many business-persons. For example, "I now have enough, and thus, require less/care less about feedback regarding my product. i can, at this point, survive on what my sales bring in..." observe what happened to Chrysler or Digital in the 70's/80's when they shut-off their 'intake valves'. Q: "What are the rights of the a/e/f?" An answer: the a/e/f has the right, behaviorally-based upon everything Life on Earth, common sense, compassion, and responsible living would most immediately suggest to a thinking-person, to pursue the maximum "bang for their buck". KC tickets ain't cheap (...and let's not even go near the table selling programs and t-shirts...it'll vacuum everything out of that pocketbook....those 8-page program books cost more per square-inch than rolling papers!)...and what's more, by virtue of the fact that KC/RF-music is quite complex, often emotionally-engaging, and mr. fripp appears to be someone with a brain that works; those who support the music (i have spoken with scores of KC-fans over the years) become involved in it actively. they feel a sense of accomplishment when they fool someone into believing that one of the instrumental cuts from Red is an unreleased song by late-Black Flag, and hence, 'turn someone on' to KC. they may be musicians who, developmentally, attach significance to mr. fripp's music and were brought-up by parents who taught them to thank people for gifts. they may be folks who feel they achieved some sort of epiphany through immersion in ideas relating to/proceeding from mr. fripp's music/writings. maybe, they saw him nearby and, as politely as they were able, approached him to say a few kind words. in this world, we do give strangers audience. mr. fripp would surely listen to a stranger alerting him that his hat was on fire. why not suffer through a few moments of sincere compliment? i observed for my partner, last night, that three different people had told her they loved her during the preceding 20 minutes. i asked her whether she was aware that very few people enjoy such a frequency of positive communication. Q: "What do you personally, as an a/e/f[,] expect of your artists/Robert Fripp[*/or anyone]?" An answer: i do not, personally, expect anything more from an artist/RF than art/musical product. i do not know the artist/RF in any way other than that which can be, usually inaccurately, inferred from examination of the artifact/commercial product; and i do not expect to meet the artist/RF, so therefore, do not have any personal social expectations lying-in-wait. *if, i were to find myself face-to-face with any human being (whether at an expensive rock concert, or in a convenience store), i would expect them to present behavior which did not threaten, degrade, or invalidate my existence. i would expect them to choreograph their own conduct based upon their needs, and communicate that to me in a way which did not threaten, degrade, or invalidate my existence. if they could not talk, for whatever reason, i would understand. this is me. i will not, as a result of what mr. fripp has communicated to the world regarding his human expectations, approach mr. fripp if the opportunity ever presents itself.=20 <<<<<<<< >>>> if and when a stranger approaches me, it is likely that either my hat is on fire, or they have experienced my art. my art is not designed to insult. it is free of/does not encourage anger. in its public form, it is Inclusive; 'walking-the-walk', if you will, in terms of being a vehicle for my philosophies regarding Life on Earth and human possibilities. because i move through the world in as mindful a state as ability and health permit, i am seldom 'caught off-guard' by elements near me. in so living, i find little need for social fear or apprehension. i am in-the-moment and nimble enough to successfully influence the vast majority of ones which require disarming. most people are. being an artist; really spending a life doing little more than making things/making things happen, has never conferred any sense of having additional rights to me. for example, i've never felt ethically justified, for any reason, to invalidate a person's existence by ignoring them completely when they initiated conversation. certainly, i have truncated conversations when the moment required me to. but, and mr. fripp may differ with me here, i have always sought to leave those i meet/those who take it upon themselves to meet me with a positive impression. why? perhaps, through word-of-mouth, somewhere down the line, i will actually benefit from having so done. perhaps the profoundly boring sod, parroting the same old gush, exhaling stale beer breath and flecks of snack, may one day pull me from an automobile accident, or be in the 'right place at the right time' in some other way. it serves no one's aim to create a hostile impression. in discussing these thoughts with friends yesterday, i heard a pleasant anecdote. steve blake, who owns Toad Hall Studios in Massachusetts, told me that his son wanted to go to a Monkees concert a few years ago, and that steve (who grew-up watching the tv show) did so. while there, he saw michael nesmith (the tall one who wore the knit hat) minding his own business off to one side of the stage. steve, still a Monkees-fan, really felt it important to share something with him. =20 what he said to mr. nesmith was this: "I've always enjoyed your music very much. This is my son, Geoffrey. When he was a baby, he had terrible colic and the only thing which helped him fall asleep was your acoustic album. I just wanted to thank you." sincerely,=20 Bret Hart/HipWorks Productions ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:15:16 +1300 (NZDT) From: james dot dignan at stonebow dot otago dot ac dot nz (James Dignan) Subject: Robert's questions >i) What is the nature of the relationship between the audience / >enthusiast / fan and the musician? >ii) What are the rights of the audience / enthusiast / fan? >iii) What are the responsibilities and obligations of the audience / >enthusiast / fan? >iv) What do you personally, as an audient / enthusiast / fan expect of >your artists? >v) What do you personally, as a KC-RF audient / enthusiast / fan expect of >Robert Fripp? I must admit I like the analogy of a priest and his congregation mentioned in a precious digest. But it is not quite how I would view the relationship. The words themselves say more: "audience" - those who listen; "enthusiasts" - those who are enthused, where enthuse means to stimulate keen interest or excitement. I believe that as an audience member, one should show respect for the musician by listening. In return, the musician should stimulate interest from his or her audience. The relationship can be compared to that of a speaker at a public gathering - the audience are there because they want to hear, the speaker is there to put his or her point across. You, as a musician, use your music to 'make your point', to produce your music. The audience has been described as vampiric or parasitic, but in many ways I see the relationship as being more symbiotic: the audience are enriched by the music, and the music is not what it would be if the audience were not present, as their addition to the surroundings helps to shape the music. This is not to say that the music is in any way created by the audience, any more than the canvas creates the painting. However, the nature of the audience can shape the music, and as such, it is the audience's obligation to create an atmosphere in which the music can be created. If this requires quiet attentiveness, so be it. If it requires energetic dancing, then so be it. As an audient, I expect that, in creating such a mood, I will be receptive to the music, and will be enriched by it - to carry my earlier analogy further, as a canvas is enriched by the addition of the artist's paint. Similarly, there is symbiosis in the audience's role as your "feedback-loop" - though we have not the right to change the direction of your music, we have the right to our opinions of your music. You have the right to ignore or take note of our opinions, as you see fit. Sadly, living in a quiet corner of the planet as I do (New Zealand) it is unlikely that I will see you perform live. However, if I ever do, I will do my small part in trying to provide the best atmosphere for the creation of you music. As a KC-RF enthusiast, I expect to be challenged and mentally stimulated by the music, and I also believe that it is my right to form a critical opinion of that music, to enjoy it or not as I see fit, and to express my opinions of the music in acceptable ways (applauding or not applauding at concerts, buying or not buying records, talking with others about the music), but not in unacceptable ways (no yelling "freebird" or throwing things onstage, for instance!). I respect: the right of you and the rest of the band to your privacy; that your stage personae and your "real" personae may not be the same; that your opinions should be treated with respect, even if they do not coincide with mine; your right to take your music in whatever direction you see fit. James Dignan ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:16:14 -0500 From: elizabeth west Subject: RE:letter from John Galgano,answer to Fripps Questions I think John's letter was great! I have considered posting responses to Mr. Fripps question also and can't seem to put any of my feelings into words. I would never actually want to meet him because I would just feel that anything that I could say would be completely inadequate to express what my true feelings are about my relationship with his music . I would probably just start crying or some other typical female thing to do. His music and writing have inspired me beyond anything else in my life. My musical writing is now somewhat limited by physical limitations but I once read (by, about, in liner notes?) that Mr. Fripps felt that his music came from some other source, like god or life force or whatever you call it. I have been telling people for years that I am in no way responsible for the music that I create except for being a vessel. I don't read music, I have tried on several occasions to try but I don't have enough discipline. I have never had any kind of musical training. My husband who plays many types of instruments is amazed when I write a piece of music that is alternately 13/8 and 25/8. I don't even know what that really means for other people. I just write what I write. I am crying as I type this because this is a major force in my life. I have carpal tunnel syndrome and am no longer supposed to play guitar for any extended period of time. I am worried that I will no longer be able to play at all but I assume that when there is a need for me to express these feelings, a way will follow. I am not a Christian but have a few good friends who are and they tell me this is what people who are born again Christians sometimes describe. I read everyone elses posts about Fripps attitude, or why they are upset because Mr. Fripp doesn't want to have a personal relationship with them. I already have a personal relationship with him through his music and in turn through my music. How much more personal could I get? Robert Fripp is in no way obligated to share anything with us that he does not want to in regards to his personal life or even his musical life. I saw Crimson for my first time this fall. If this was my only opportunity to see them, I am more than satisfied. I would love the opportunity to see them again but it was such a powerful experience for me that if I don't see them again, I will still be happy. I didn't care what the audience was doing, what my husband was doing, what my friends were doing. This was all part of the total experience, including the people smoking pot in front of me and standing up so that I couldn't see anything, and waiting in line to go to the bathroom during intermission, the people screaming "Do Schizoid Man!" during the quiet times of the concert, people shouting "Play you bastards!" when everyone in KC stopped playing for about a minute during the middle of a song, and me noticing that Robert put his hand in rest position when the rest of the band kept their hands absolutely still in the position that they were previously playing. I never intentionally set out to be influenced by Roberts music. The first KC song I heard was Indiscipline, played over a phone line almost 8 years ago. I was hooked. I had just purchased my first guitar about a year before this and decided that Adiran was God and tried to emulate him. I even ripped out the frets on that same guitar. Somewhere between that point and the present Mr. Fripp managed to come between us!:) It was a gradual change, slipping in while I wasn't paying attention, I guess. I still have the utmost respect for Adrian and love what he does as much as I love what Fripp and the rest of the guys in KC do. Sorry this letter got so long. I guess this is my response to Fripps question(s). Robert-thank you for being who you are and doing what you do. Elizabeth West ------------------------------ From: Mark Jakusovszky Subject: RF Questions Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 17:23:09 -0700 GoOD LoRD! The master speaks (OK, writes)! I appreciate the opportunity to respond, not in thoughtless reaction, but in measured, precise words communicating comprehension and consideration. >[ Note to readers, in the light of the controversy about whether the post >from Adrian Belew a few issues ago was genuine: this next post is indeed >from Robert -- Toby ] One always wonders (and for good reason). >Date: 13 Jan 97 05:16:45 EST (EST? Are you recording with Tony?) >Subject: From Robert Fripp >Monday, 13th. January 1997. >Dear Team, >1. Harvey Keitel and Kevin Spacey should play Fripp in "King Crimson: The >Movie", in alternating scenes. Who cares if anyone's confused? Maybe 2 (or more) personalities is EXACTLY the correct way to portray Robert Fripp properly. As for confusing people, I submit that that may also be in character. >2. Stop arguing about Fripp's attitude towards you, etc., and acknowledge >he's the greatest guitarist in the world. Here! Here! Talking about music is like dancing about architecture (or something like that)! However, can you objectively substantiate your claim as the greatest guitarist? By what measure? Your assertion is taken in the manner it was given. >3. Would ET readers be kind enough to consider, and respond, to these >questions: >i) What is the nature of the relationship between the audience / enthusiast >/ fan and the musician? The relationship between musician and listener (to use a 4th identifier) is much like any other commercial or personal relationship in life, except that the common basis and the major mode of communication is 1) the craft, the music, and 2) the applause and (dare I say it) revenue stream, or lack thereof. This is the basic feedback mechanism and mutual respect is the foundation. Fanzines, reviews, interviews, web sites, liner notes, and even ET are insignificant in light of this primary communication. The musician practices his craft to the best of his abilities and by the compass of his intellect and passion. If the music stirs in the listener whatever it is that he finds pleasurable / stimulating / exciting, then the listener, of his own free will, will encourage the artist to continue his quest/aim through positive feedback of applause, ovations, record and ticket sales, etc.... This in turn enables and empowers the musician to practice his craft further. I must break here, as I suspect that this particular subset of listeners (fans of KC/RF) are for the most part stimulated by polyphony, intricate rhythm, meter, tonality, etc.. Many are probably musicians themselves and as such, hold in contempt many other musicians/artists that they in turn do not support or give positive feedback. However, I submit that, given the definition above, KISS, Tom Jones, GWAR, The Dead Kennedys, DEVO, and Wayne Newton ARE musicians. Their craft differs greatly from what RF and KC create, but they also are supported by those that their craft touches and who, in turn, applaud them and buy their CDs, concert tickets, memorabilia, etc.... If they were not, they would cease to have a musician/listener relationship. In practice, there are (false) perceptions on both parties' sides that the relationship is different. This includes sycophantic fans who believe that they are more important than they are, disinterested artists who refuse to listen to and react to the feedback provided, arrogant/aloof fans that believe that the artist "owes them" something, and other such dysfunctional relationships. These end as all dysfunctional relationships end: quickly and abruptly. "But what about musicians that play for their own enjoyment/fulfillment/recreation?" I believe that these people also are musicians, but they do not share in the benefits and responsibilities that are one with the musician/listener relationship. >ii) What are the rights of the audience / enthusiast / fan? The listener has two basic rights; 1) to continue to be stimulated / enlightened / pleasured by listening, and 2) discontinuing support or encouragement of the artist if right #1 is no longer being met. What rights do listeners NOT have; criticism of the craft positioned as authoritative. Everyone is entitled to a personal opinion. However, that opinion is not to be used to denigrate those with whose opinions you disagree (e.g. telling a Wayne Newton fan that what they enjoy is not REAL music), nor should it be used to criticize the artists themselves (e.g. RF is headed way off track with this double-trio concept. He should go back/move on to a leaner/more fluid/jazzier/more complex theme. Oh yeah, and he should lose that front guy/old guy/bald guy/young guy/new guy!) In a performance situation, the listener does NOT have the right to insert themselves into others' musician/listener relationship. >iii) What are the responsibilities and obligations of the audience / >enthusiast / fan? The listener is obliged to respect the artist and the choices that he makes in molding and shaping his craft, respect the rights of other listeners to choose the artists for whom they wish to support and encourage, and to support those artists whose craft brings pleasure/ excitement/fulfillment to them (or else risk losing them). >iv) What do you personally, as an audient / enthusiast / fan expect of your >artists? Turning from the whole to the individual, I answer this in my own imperfect voice. I expect "my" artists to engage me with their craft, both from an intellectual and an emotional level. Music. Art. Architecture. Theatre. They all must not be conservative or cold, rote or visceral. I also prefer (not expect, nor demand) to be able to participate physically in the relationship (roughly meaning I like to be able to experience the craft in the form of live performance). >v) What do you personally, as a KC-RF audient / enthusiast / fan expect of >Robert Fripp? I expect you, Robert, to continue to create music that is capable of engaging both my intellectual and emotional sensibilities, not FOR me, but out of your own self-respect and respect for the craft that you have chosen as your life's work. I expect you to respect me in my role as a listener and not pander to me, nor exploit me based on an expectation that I will blindly follow where you go, for if I do, I no longer am truly participating in the musician/listener relationship. >Since 1969 I have received reviews, articles, interviews, commentaries, and >letters from fans and enthusiasts numbering in the thousands. Since it >began, I have scanned and read Discipline / Elephant Talk. For several >years I have undertaken this as part of my personal discipline. As part of >a discipline, the question is always: how can I use this to help me serve >my aim? >No other musicians of my acquaintance or knowing read as widely as myself >the commentaries and chit-chat concerning them. My hunch is because, in >various ways and for various reasons, the musicians often get hurt, >sometimes injured, and even damaged. To put it another way, most public >commentary has negative "side" (in the country use of the word) to it. To >put it differently, the net benefit is negligible. And to get to net >benefit, you have to read it all. I don't see how anyone would want to read >it all for fun. >My personal approach is to either read everything or nothing. In between >can be harmful. If you read nothing, it doesn't reach you. If you do read >it all (pretty well) probably the net balance (in a love / hate, nice guy / >creep way) simply balances. I understand that Brian Eno doesn't (or did not) read anything in the fear that it would color what he would do based on the expectations of his audience. You do the opposite. Are you simply more impartial, impervious, indifferent? I believe so. That does not imply that you are a better or worse musician or artist. I do believe that it may, however, expose you to sentiments that are not available to you through applause or record sales, but that nonetheless exist in the 'audience'. This may provide benefit through reflection and considered reaction. >Whenever someone gets really nasty or personal, it doesn't touch me. >Firstly, because it has nothing to do with me: the commentator is >commenting on themselves. Secondly, it's like walking through a farmyard: >if you step into a cow pat, it's not particularly informative, or >instructive (other than telling you to wake up and look where you're >walking) but, because you wear Wellington boots, it doesn't touch you >either. Although it may make a nasty smell. And then you wash your boots. If you are exposed to something of this nature, I agree that it is like what Americans call 'junk food', where the information physically passes through you, but is of no nutritional value and hence nothing is available to be absorbed, internalized, and utilized....... >Occasionally I receive a letter, or see one in ET, that gladdens my heart: >someone has actually seen how it works! Clean feedback is a joy, a reward, >a friend. It is impersonal. .....However, that which does have some merit must be internalized to produce any benefit. If your umbrella blocks all the rain, how will the flowers grow? >Where the elephantosities touch upon the relationship between musicians and >enthusiasts, fans and followers, my responses have moved between >bemusement, amazement, laughter, anger and sheer disbelief that mature and >reasonable people might come to their expressed opinions and judgments, >often with some heat, on the basis of a clearly developed sense of what >they expect of the artists they patronize; umbrage when these expectations >are not met; with clearly implied assumptions on the part of what the >artist's position is / should / might / can only be, and certainly is >despite anything, in any case, anyway, because I've bought my ticket with >hard-earned pay and that gives me rights. >So, what rights? What obligations? What expectations? What assumptions? >4. Very little in my life is arbitrary. >In all the comments on "Fripp's 'tude" I don't recall anyone commenting >that my onstage and offstage behaviour might simply be practical, and in >some way serving my aim. Also, that this is itself part of an ongoing >exploration and learning curve for me of how I do what I do. >This is an alternative approach to "Fripp's a jerk, so who cares?" or >"Fripp's a genius, so how can we know?" lines of enquiry. I submit that the two are not mutually exclusive; there are many geniuses that are jerks and vice versa. >If any commentator did burble and banter about that one, the first question >is probably "What is Fripp's aim?" before moving to how this eccentric / >standoffish / egotistical / rude / kind / brilliant Englishman's behaviour >might serve that aim. >5. Actually, I am very grateful for the level of public support which has >enabled me to remain a musician, or at least a guitarist, for 38 years. My >own feelings towards this public are intimate, yet utterly impersonal. And >sometimes personal. And I am grateful that you choose to continue to do so and that your life's work is able to inspire / excite / interest me. I submit that the musician/ listener relationship is a symbiotic one. We are separate and yet inseparable within that context. You, Mr. Fripp, could very well have started or been employed by an actuarial firm and yet still manage to tote your guitar down to the local watering hole on Saturday night and remain a musician and guitarist. It would, however, in that context, cease to be your life's work. I, on the other hand, am partial to more artists than one (musical and otherwise) and can still partake in the artist/observer relationship even if I have never been to your local pub. As it is, I prefer things just the way they are. Mark Jakusovszky ------------------------------ End of Elephant-Talk Digest #344 ********************************