Elephant Talk #345 (as text)
11 February 1997
From: "Merleh" <merleh at icanect dot net>
Subject: Robert, are we over intellectualizing Crimson?
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 19:40:27 -0500
First, I thoroughly enjoy your work with Crimson and how it has
evolved over the years. At the risk of appearing to be a suckup, I have
followed the band from the very beginning--when I heard the mellotron
blasting over a head shop's speakers in 1969 with "In the Court." I
derived pleasure then, as I do now, from your adventurousness, or as you
put it, making risky career decisions. I'd like to think that your going to
the edge musically has made converts of many of us.
Second, your band and its level of musicianship is state of the
art. I've seen you live and have been thrilled with the sound. You guys
set the standard.
However, I am troubled by all the analyzing ad nauseum that goes on
about you and your music: Are you rude to your audience? Who cares. Are
you surrendering the band to Adrian? That's ludicrous. What greater truth
are you trying to impart to us? What does this matter.
All that does matter is the music. Do we like it or not? Does it
strike some resounding chord within our being? Is the music a pleasurable
experience, or not? If we like it, we should listen further. If it is
irritating, turn it off.
I do not blindly follow you because you're Robert Fripp, a well
recognized and accomplished guitarist/composer, or because of any other
silly reason. I simply get great enjoyment out of listening to your music.
Why do we have to over analyze: 1) every goddamned bit of trivia
pertaining to you or the band? 2) What you say or don't say, 3) whether
you're in the spotlight or not?
Just enjoy the music. I have friends who are musicians, as I am.
Some dissect music until there is nothing left but a cadaver in bloody
pieces, with no resemblance to the original piece.
Other friends, myself included, look at what you have accomplished
with Crimson and say, "Wow." You hit the groove, you tap into the sonic
frontier, you create a thing of beauty.
Enough analyzing, don't you think? We don't need to know all the
reasons. All that matters is the music. And for nearly 30 years, you have
blown me away with your music.
Date: 09 Feb 97 00:59:50 EST
From: Palmer <73670 dot 2065 at CompuServe dot COM>
Subject: Fripp's Aim
I find that the "Exposure" pages off the ET website has a concise answer to
this question, that is credited to RF:
>[Referring to _Exposure_,] "The album itself, musically, brought
>everything I'd done up to that point together and it was essentially
>an M.O.R. album. It was a kind of autobiography on three levels: one
>was the day-to-day life and the stuff that happens - you're dreaming,
>the telephone goes off, you have an argument with the woman you're
>living with, you rush off to work, your mother phones you up and
>bends your ear, and finally at the end of the album you calm down
>and go to sleep again, and go out in dreams. So that's that level,
>the other is that it's an investigation of internalized family
>archetypes, psychological archetypes; 'Disengage' is a kind of rock
>version of 'Schizophrenia Madness in the Family' [...], the basic
>premise of [that] book is that schizophrenia (which has never been
>clinically defined) is where the family makes the person feel crazy.
>[...] That's the other level; and the third is, of course, that it
>had to do with starting some kind of inner development, and the
>commitment to work and that it's impossible to achieve the aim
> the aim is freedom, conscience and truth,
^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^
>in Bennett's words - that comes from the first inaugural address to
>Sherborne House. [Recorder III]"
That the aim would be freedom, conscience and truth is immediately
agreeable, in part because in meaningful ways these words to me have long
characterized what is important and significant.
Freedom, "absence of constraint in choice": A necessary condition to make a
moral choice - if one is compelled then one's own morality has been
Conscience, "the sense of moral goodness": Self-awareness, and then to
recognize one's place in the world, begins to establish what constitutes
the good life.
Truth, "sincerity in action": To find out what the Great Work is and then
to do it.
As for the immediately earlier phrase in the extract, from the time I first
heard that comment on the album it has caught some disagreement from me.
While in practice suffering comes because we do not have perfect knowledge
of how to achieve the aim most effectively, or because to affect a change
is also to break relationships, this does not make it necessarily so that
we _must_ suffer for our aims. To say "impossible" is to accept
inevitability, and to deny free will.
John R. Palmer
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 15:31:54 -0500 (EST)
From: COSMICAC at aol dot com
Subject: All This Frippery
As I suspect is the case with most of the ET community, I was happily
amazed that Mr. Fripp would take the time and make the effort to post on
ET, and far more amazed when the postings continued. Why?
First, Fripp's postings, separate and apart from the insight that we
receive from them, reveal that he has a great deal of respect for his
audience, and in an utterly impersonal manner, affection for our enthusiasm
as well. This says as much about us as it does about Fripp. Personally, I
am honored, and I hope that this puts to rest once and for all the thread
concerning Fripp's "tude" towards his audience. I humbly speak for what I
am certain is the majority of our community in saying that I value this
interaction with Fripp more that all the signatures on the tour programme
and handshakes in the world. Thank you, Mr. Fripp!
I believe that Fripp is once again taking a bold new step by experimenting
with a new form of instantaneous, mass communication with a diverse, global
community of interest in his work. I for one think that we are together
participating in something that is as revolutionary, and I am thrilled to
be a part of it, even if I am just reading the discourse and not adding
anything. The unknowns raised by this experiment are as interesting as the
content of the discussion. To wit: (1) Since I know that Fripp is reading,
and I am addressing him along with the ET community, do I continue to write
as if he were not reading this, or is it more approprite to address him
directly? The former could be deemed disrepectful (or perhaps utterly
impersonal) while the latter seems a bit presumptuous, since this is not
personal correspondence and he has no responsibility to respond as if this
were a personal chat. I do not see why anything should change, and I think
that this is and will always remain primarily a forum for the ET community
as opposed to an "ask Fripp" dialog. Having said that, I notice that I
began this post by referring to him as "Mr. Fripp." That just sounds so
utterly impersonal! (2) If Fripp were to suddenly fall silent without
explanation, what would we make of it? Did he tire of the banter? Did I
say something to make him angry? Is lack of communication a way of
communicating something to us in and of itself? Hopefully, if Fripp elects
to put an end to the experiment, he will let us know. However, I have hope
that he will find the experiment to be so fascinating that he stays in
touch and develops a permanent link with our community. We cannot expect
to receive a post a day forever, but periodic contact and hopefully, an
occasional bombardment, would be extremely insightful and enjoyable. (3)
If Fripp disagrees with a statement of opinion or the accuracy of a
reported fact in ET, is he under any moral obligation to either share his
insights or correct the mistake, at least while he is taking the trouble to
communicate with our community? As a practical matter, if Fripp were to do
so, he would surely have no time to record a single thing, and we would all
eventually get bored with one another, but where is Fripp to draw the line?
It will be interesting to see.
(4) What will Fripp take from our discourse? Will he be persuaded that
releasing some of the bootlegged live material would not be such a bad idea?
Will he give us a gem like pulling out and dusting off an old song on the
next tour? Will it affect his concept of King Crimson and influence his
ideas for the direction of the double trio? Judging from the Epitaph set
and 21st CSM being played on the Hoard tour notwithstanding Adrian's
interest in the later material, I think that the answer is obvious. Didn't
the idea for Thrakattack come from an ET post?
Second, the insight that our community is receiving at this moment is a
radical departure from the typical artist-audience relationship. Where
before we had the music and the occasional interview as a means to obtain
information about everything King Crimson/Fripp, both of which are an
indirect and sometimes perilous manner of communication for both artist and
audience, we now are getting a few answers (and alot of questions!)
directly from the source, or as they say, directly from the horse's mouth.
What makes this so significant is that the source in this case is the focal
point of our community of interest. Furthermore, the source, in this case,
is eloquent, outspoken, and possesses strong convictions. Fripp can, if he
choses, answer any question of fact and offer his thoughts about any ideas
that we may discuss in this forum. And he can do it instantaneously and
globally. This is something like Dali dropping in on a class about
Twentieth Century art and engaging us in a discussion of his blue period.
I am enthusiastic about getting the artist's viewpoint, and I feel that it
*greatly enhances* my appreciation of the art.
Finally, yes Robert, you are in fact the one true greatest guitarist in the
world, hands down. Would you just please sign my tour programme for me?
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 19:38:29 -0500 (EST)
From: BPatter38 at aol dot com
Subject: Tribute Collection
My sons (19 & 20 years old) and I have joined together as a three piece
band that prefers what we call progressive rock. We currently do four King
Crimson covers. The four are VROOOM, Red, Heartbeat, and Easy Money.
We've tried The Great Deceiver with some rough results. I'd be willing to
contribute any of the first four to do a tribute to our (the boys and mine)
As an additional note, if anybody has any patches for a Roland GR1 guitar
synth that they'd like to share please EMail me. I'm specifically looking
for any mellotron sounding patches and backwards guitar patches for my GR1.
Guess what music I want to use them with!
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 21:19:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Biffyshrew at aol dot com
Subject: Metrical Structure of "Breathless"
Before this argument over the imaginary time signature 3/3 goes any
farther, I'd like to point out that the whole discussion is rooted in a
Eric Tamm's book _Robert Fripp_ quotes Fripp as saying that the middle
section of "Breathless" is in "3/3 plus 3/8 with the guitar in 9/8 over the
top of it." This quote is taken from an interview in the August 1979 issue
of Musician. But if you consult the original magazine (which I just
happened to find at a record swap today), you'll see that what Fripp
actually said was that the passage is in "33 plus 3/8"--i.e., 33 eighth
notes plus a further three eighth notes. This is still a peculiar way of
expressing the meter, but at least it adds up, unlike the nonsensical 3/3.
A more sensible way to describe this meter is to say that the rhythm
section is playing a cycle consisting of three measures of 11/8 followed by
one measure of 3/8. Each of the 11/8 measures is clearly divided into 4/4
+ 3/8, so the cycle could be notated as: 4/4 + 3/8 + 4/4 + 3/8 + 4/4 + 3/8
This is clearly what the bass and drums are playing on the record.
Happy to have been of service,
Biffy the Elephant Shrew @}-`--}----
...visit me at http://users.aol.com/biffyshrew/biffy.html
"If you're a composer in America, everything is stacked against you."--Frank
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 21:26:50 -0500 (EST)
From: ASchulberg at aol dot com
Subject: King Crimson cited
Was reading the February 20, 1997 issue of Rolling Stone (with Gillian
Anderson on the cover). There on page 29 was the following pull-quote:
"Banyan will probably receive the same reaction King Crimson did 20 years
In context, it turns out that Steven Perkins of Porno for Pyros, Money Mark
of the Beastie Boys, Nels Cline and Mike Watt of fIREHOSE and the
Minutemen, have been listening to a lot of Stravinsky and improvising.
"...The Stravinsky influence is perceptible only in the rhythm and pacing,
while the music itself is far more strange and otherworldly; spare, angular
beats accented by occasional guitar and keyboard flourishes that sound like
a cat fight in slow motion. 'I don't know what people will think,"
[Perkins] says. "Probably the same reaction people had when they first
heard King Crimson 20 years ago.' "
Sound like THRaKaTTaK to anyone else?
ASchulberg at aol dot com
"To be is to do."- Sartre
"To do is to be."- Nietzsche
"Do be do be do."- Sinatra
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 20:39:01 -0800
From: Stephen Arthur <sarthur at ucla dot edu>
Subject: Prog CD and Book sale in Aspic, Part III
Sorry I have not gotten back to any of you individually about your inquires
into my small collection of CDs and Books. I have been very busy with
school, and I got so many replies that my e-mail account got jammed and I
lost all of your messages before I could reply individually.
Here is how I have decided to handle the selling of my collection. I would
rather sell it in blocks, not individual CDs if possible, because it would
mean less of a hassle for me collecting cash/checks and dealing with the
number product original
of people price ease in finding:
interested (if worth posting)
22 'Robert Fripp', Eric Tamm $12.95 hard to find
8 'Brian Eno', Eric Tamm $12.95 hard to find
12 'Damage', Fripp/Sylvian $15.99 hard to find
4 '1999', Fripp $14.99? easy
1 'Improvisation', D. Bailey $12.95 hard to find
1 'Robert Fripp/League of... easy
1 'The Acoustic Adrian Belew' hard in USA?
1 'Bill Bruford's Earthworks' easy
1 'Matching Mole's Little... hard
1 'Matching Mole' Matching Mole hard
1 'June 1, 1974' Ayers/Cale/Eno/Nico hard
0 'Dali's Car' Live Eno from the 70's hard
0 'Ruth Is Stranger Than Richard' Robert Wyatt hard
0 'Rock Bottom' Robert Wyatt hard
1 'Between Thought and Expression' $10.95 hard
The other stuff is not worth listing and I can probably trade here in LA.
(I know prices of CDs vary a lot).
I thought a good way of grouping the stuff is:
Fripp, Eno, Derek Bailey and Gurdjieff $48 gets all four, I
will pay postage in USA.
If you do not want them all, please do contact me anyway,
and of course, if they are still available, and we can negotiate them into
Lou Reed, "Between thought and Expression", I really do not want
to part with this one: $20, I pay postage in USA.
$50 gets you this disk, the other disks go for $13 bucks each,
I pay postage in the USA.
Combo deals are preferred. A lower 'bid' on Damage is
also (The highest offer I got was $40). I am not playing the
miser or hording, (just trying to get a fair price as does
Productions) counter offer with specific numbers or disks
and anything may be yours, it is just going to be a pain in
doing this (I am not a business you know, make it worth my
does that make sense?)
I have seen the ELP and YES CDs selling used for $5 to $7, so they are not
on my list.
My list for trading CDs has narrowed down to (new price from Noteworthy
"Major Works: Ascension, Om, Selflessness, Kulu", John Coltrane, 2
"Bitches Brew", Miles Davis, 2 CDs ($17)
"Ask the Ages", Sonny Sharrock ($11)
I have seen these used before (big deal!)
I am still pretty flexible, just a little overwhelmed. Anyway I'd prefer
I found the new Adrian Belew Cd "Op Zop Too Wah" used ($9). It is amazing like
everyone has said. If the 'The Beatles' ever get back together and tour, they
ought to hire Adrian do play in John Lennon's part, and get the Elephant Talk
off his back. Then did would not need King Crimson's history, and his daughter
would stop singing "Oh! Daddy!" As they are teaching me to say in college:
"Way to go Adrian!"
Since I have appointed myself the role of playing Jamie Muir in the
upcoming King Crimson movie (not a huge part, I know), does anyone
have a recommendation of any small but cool percussion instrument
that I can learn to play, I swear I can act?
I hope I have not scared anyone off (especially Fripp!)
or broken any ET rules.
steve (Jamie Muir)
From: mnolan at pdd dot pioneer dot co dot uk (Matthew Nolan)
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 10:36:37 +0000
Subject: Primetime airplay for 'Cage'
Today, on (UK) BBC Radio 1, 8:45am (approx), 'Cage' from the Vrooom EP was
played in full (not that it's that long).
There is a feature called 'The Missionary Position' where listeners
write/fax/email in requests for a favorite song of theirs, given that it's
a bit odd and not at all well known or popular. I.E. you're being a
missionary trying to convert the nation, etc, etc.
So I (pessimistically) sent an email to the DJ, requesting Cage about 3
weeks ago. This morning I nearly choked on my toast when he actually played
I don't know how many people heard it, or have a heightened awareness /
interest in KC since, but I may have inadvertently gone some way to
realising 'an aim' of Robert Fripp's.
Talking on a Compuserve IRC chat (included in the interview links on ET
Web), answering a question about SSEDD being used for a TV advert:
(#71,Robert Fripp) Natrel - I was asked for permission (on behalf of the
other guys) as to whether Cage from the mini CD VROOOM could be used for a
Gillette advert. Since I use Gillette it was fine by me. Not cigarettes,
not alcohol. The other guys were also asked for their input. But the firm
asking permission (Saatchi & Saatchi) made a mistake - they really meant
"Ses SEDD". So we all had a BIG surprise when a deodorant ad with a
different song came up! My personal aim was to have a wild Crimson song
(Cage) presented to a public which would otherwise probably never have
I only wish getting publicity for my own band's material was so easy!
Matt Nolan (The Rob Beadle Triangle Band - watch out in the next few months!)
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 11:25:23 +0100 (CET)
From: PEZZUTO at AXPLE2 dot le dot infn dot it
Subject: Alice WEB pages
I prepared a draft version of WEB pages for the Italian singer/writer
Alice. At this stage the pages are very "empty" and, compared with the
pages dedicated to King Crimson or David Sylvian for instance, quite ugly,
but I hope to improve their appearence in the next future. The URL is
http://nexus.sinet.it/servizi_esterni/alice/Alice.HTM (the WEB server runs
under Linux, so pay attention to capital letters). These pages, at
present, are only in Italian but an English version will be set up asap.
Following the link to "Discografia e testi" you'll find the lyrics of The
third star (also "La terza stella"), from the last work of Trey Gunn; the
link "Collaborazioni" is dedicated to all the musicians have worked with
Alice. For each musician I reported the link to the WEB page as found in
the King Crimson and D.Sylvian sites. If you know links not reported in my
pages, please let me know. Also, if you have news, interviews, photos and
want to share them, do not hesitate to send me your materials. Also
comments and suggestions are welcome. This message has been sent to the
Elephant Talk and David Sylvian mailing lists. Feel free to forward it to
any mailing list or newsgroup you think interested. A warm "thank you" to
Toby Howard and Keesjan van Bunningen from whose sites I retrieved a 90% of
the informations reported in my pages.
Thanks to you all,
Stefano pezzuto at le dot infn dot it
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 19:36:42 -0500 (EST)
From: ron at inforamp dot net (Ron Schroeder)
Subject: KC to Jethro Tull
Regarding the Jethro Tull and KC connection, I am sure that there are more,
but how about this one ...
Adrian Belew played with Zappa who played with Beefheart who played with
John French who played with Richard Thompson who played with Dave Pegg
while in Fairport AND Tull at the same time.
Mike Coburn, Toronto
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 00:25:11 +0000
From: Orn Orrason <"ossi at isholf dot is, ossi"@kerfi.hi.is>
Organization: Systems Engineering lab University of Iceland
Subject: Young persons guide to energy
This is my response to Roberts wonderful letter on the relationship to
energy and performance. It seems that Robert main aim in performing live
is to experience the energy build up that a concert can create. It is to be
judged by his writings that the right magic energy seldom builds due to
various factors but when that happens all kind of magic can happen, like
music playing it self to new heighths. Robert warns that this is his
personal opinion but suggests that many ET readers should know in some way
what he means.
Well I have personally never played in a band but I think this effect can
be experienced in many group working surroundings. One example (not for
anti sportists this one) is a good football game. I have often played games
that for some reasons are much better than others, it is like everyone is
200% better then they normally are and you self feel you can do
everything. It is a wonderful experience, like a good healing. This can
sometimes be felt when working with a group but for someone who deals with
machines (computers) it is seldom=20 experienced there.
As an audience I feel this "musical energy" can be felt more often when
listening to bands in small clubs, with a small audience group. These are
my best concerts. I have been to many big concerts of course but rarely get
moved there. I come there to see bands I have listended for a long time on
records and "just wan=B4t to see them". Usually they are distant (in
meters) and have no contact with the audience. A good performer who talks
to the audience can however really change this situation and in some way
can hypnothyse the audience and as a result of that raise the energy level
which again creates better music. I have never been to a King Crimson
concert but from what I read I don=B4t think they communicate enough with
the audience (Robert feel free to disagree here ! ). They are serious
musicians who really want to let the music speak.
One word to Robert. Great you have CALMED DOWN, I really enjoyed
your writings and I think that after this period of your ET contribution
he newsletter will never be the same. I wouldn=B4t like to read
everything said about me in private conversation in a public newsletter
and although it is "The Internet" the basic principles for publications
should be regarded. I hope the discussion level will raise from now on.
And finally Robert, don=B4t forget us the paying fans and be grateful to
us. I am sure that my 30+ CDs and LPs (only 2 illegal bootlegs) have
brought you enough money to buy at least one dinner. Not all of these CD
have been played often. The gems in between make it all worthwile.
Dipl.Ing. (Communication Engineer, University of Iceland)
Email : ossi at kerfi dot hi dot is (w) ossi at isholf dot is (h)
Tel : (Univ.) (354) 525 4699 (PTI) (354) 589 9111
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 19:00:22 -0500 (EST)
From: KRosser414 at aol dot com
Subject: Q's for ET and/or RF
Since RF has acknowledged that he may comment upon some questions raised in
ET, I'd like to offer these (and certainly open them up for general
1) The longest-running personnel association in KC has been between RF and
Bill Bruford (about a quarter century now, right?). While on the personal
level much of this is obviously private (and as you say, should remain so),
could you characterize in a general sense what makes this association work
for you and/or KC?
Or, ET readers could rephrase the question, "What is it about the
Fripp/Bruford alliance that makes it so compelling?".
2) What is it about English guitar players from the sixties? It seems as
though that era in that particular location gave us Clapton, Beck, Page,
McLaughlin, Holdsworth, Summers, Fripp, Howe, undoubtedly a few more obvious
ones I'm forgetting, and the shadow they've cast on music in the 60's, 70's,
80's and 90's is huge. I'm interested in what RF's perspective on this
phenomenon might be - was it something in the culture, the media, the
marketplace, what have you? Is there a common factor other than national
that you all share?
Date: 07 Feb 97 18:47:51 -0500
From: Greg Bastug <GBastug at essexusa dot com>
Subject: How to Meet Fripp
Over the past 15 years, I've had several encounters with Robert Fripp,
and he hasn't run from any of them: it's rewarding to find out what
matter most to Fripp, (and to yourself). He's been at times charming,
funny, angry, satirical, but always truthful.I don't know anyone in the
industry, nor do I get backstage passes. And though sublime, his
comments in ET are virtually a blueprint on how and when Fripp will
reliably speak to you. It seems, though, almost no one here has read
between the lines...
Re-read his posts. After carefully contemplation, you'll have an epiphany
- a clear picture, after endless staring, rising from 3D stereo noise!
It will become (in what soon should become a household phrase) as simple
as Thrak what you need to do to avoid being the next peeved and venting
(becoming an ex-) admirer/fan/soulmate/brother/customer.
Take note of these few hints - (sorry for revealing this RF, but your
words just don't hit the right chords...)
W The approach must be mutual.
W You must choose a place where Fripp is at home.
W The places are often quite noisy, but you must be willing to listen
(though don't be surprised nor shut-out what others nearby Fripp have to
W Ask what you wish, but his answers, in Fripp fashion, are usually open
to interpretation (though, by your exercising control, he will repeat
W If things do get repetitive, don't fret, even if he seems to; Fripp is
apt to reveal new ideas this way.
W Be alert! Fripps' tone differs when alone vs. with others. Your
expectations should change too.
W You can stand or sit, though I prefer sitting along with him. Both can
appreciate how this benefits concentration.
W If you're fortunate, you'll get nearly an hour with him.
W Contrary to his stage desires, you can be in a well lit place and it
won't bother him.
W If you invest wisely in such encounters, he will symbolize his
appreciation with an autograph.
Good luck tracking him down!
GBastug at essexusa dot com
(PS - See you soon, RF)
hi,open letter to dmg.
thinking about robert's request conserning bootlegs;i don't have any
crimson ones that are true to the moment,but i do have a frippertronics one
that scorches! "pleasures in pieces" is anything but, and i thought i would
run it passed dmg before i made a copy of this vinal boot.produced by
australian light &magic 1978 lunar toones, it soars! recorded 2/5/78 at the
kitchen ny,ny., is it possible a master tape exsists ?
also, just an idea,release "easter sunday" from the guitar player sample
in the mid 1980's, with songs on the vinal ,not cd version of david
sylvian's "gone to earth". this has many great moments not recorded on cd
such as;"camp fire coyote",and other amazing fripp work not on the cd.
(emailers,believe me when i say ,you better make your best offer your
first if you ask me for a copy of pleasure in pieces.)
on the bruford debate vs. allan white,allan white is the best rock
drummer, said john anderson at a yes concert during the talk tour.
bill bruford then is the best percussionist in the world said me!
feels good to me.ii saw the union tour and was very disapointed.now the
bruford and howe and levin tour was the best i've ever saw of yes(music),
in my seven times of seeing yes. it was one of a kind.
look foward to more of robert's postings.
thanks all at et...bless you all!
Date: 10 Feb 97 12:04:20 EST
From: Discipline Global Mobile <73064 dot 1470 at CompuServe dot COM>
Subject: Update I & II
Monday 10th. February, 1997.
This is to update interested parties on the operation of Discipline
Global Mobile in the United States.
Originally in the US, DGM and Possible Productions were set up and
operated by Mark Perry. Possible Productions marketed, through licensed
distributors and mail order, DGM records and related goodies.
As Possible grew, it seemed to me that we actually had two distinct
entities developing: DGM the record company, and PP the supplier and
(increasingly) mail order business.
Towards the end of last year we separated out DGM and PP, with
Michael Tedesco in charge of the DGM office in Los Angeles and Mark
continuing to operate mail order from Long Beach.
As DGM begins to re-establish itself in the US, and begin to
address its own mail order operation for the future, Mark has now chosen to
pass over the Possible Productions mail order business in its entirety to
So, any mail order enquiries and orders, which would formerly have
been addressed to Mark at Possible Productions, should now be sent to:
PO Box 5282,
(213)937 9102: fax.
We shall make the transition as smoothly and quickly as
possible. When we are in fully operational mode, we'll be sending the
Discipline Newsletters to all those on the mailing list.
A personal acknowledgement from Robert:
Mark is an enthusiast. Without his energy and enthusiasm, and
Cheryl's help and support, Discipline as a record company may not have been
able to happen. Thank you Mark, thank you Cheryl.
Crimso the Great Playback: London, Saturday 15th. March, 1997.
Michael Giles, Ian McDonald, Peter Sinfield and Robert Fripp have
all expressed their intention to be present at the playback. Greg Lake may
also be able to attend. David Enthoven and John Gaydon (the original "EG"
and from happier times) are also likely to be there.
The response is larger than we anticipated and we are currently looking
for a suitable playback venue. The current schedule is this:
13:00 Doors open and consumption of Little Beasts,
parting with hard-earned pay, mingling
15:00 Presentation & playback
17:30 More consumption of cake,
parting with more hard-earned pay,
even more mingling, etc.
18.30 De-vibration of facility
19:00 Venue clear
That is, we are not currently planning any event for the evening.
The Great Roberto.
Date: 10 Feb 97 12:04:17 EST
From: Discipline Global Mobile <73064 dot 1470 at CompuServe dot COM>
Subject: Short shots on Elephant-Talk Digest #336:
Monday 10th. February, 1997.
Short shots on Elephant-Talk Digest #336:
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 04:56:28 -0500
From: future perfect <artmusic at gte dot net>
Subject: "Tribute" Question for Robert
A few of us here on the list have been considering doing a tribute
cassette of sorts, featuring renditions of our favorite KC songs. This
would be distributed amongst ourselves with no exchange of money, and for
our own amusement. Do you have any comments/concerns about this project?
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:31:39 -0500
From: Mr-Neurotica <neurotica at videotron dot ca>
Organization: Neurotica Web Evolution
Subject: Crimson tribute
Now.. many people were talking about a Crimson kinda "tribute" and if
i'm not mistaken there are many ETers who seems to b pretty interested in
such a thing and who are also musicians. Being a drummer myself and a
Bruford-sorta-maniac-kinda-dude for over 20 years, I would b *very*
interested in participating in such an adventure. What i propose would be
to work on a midi project where the participants would each lay down a
track and pass it on to the next guy and so on... until we have a finished
product. Not only we could do some interpretation but we could also have a
"B" side where we could indulge ourself in some
highly-crimson-influenced-material. (any midi guitar or bass player in the
croud??) And then we could put all of this on a web site for all the ETers
to enjoy!! I'd like to get your toughts on this project.
1. You don't need my permission to play any music that you'd like to play.
Go for it.
2. (This follows several concerns expressed in ET) no copyright permissions
for any Crimson pieces are needed, unless the material is
rearranged. Should there be any difficulties (with BMG Publishing) I am
happy to personally intervene.
3. I would ask: what is the aim of making a tribute album? The obvious
answer is, to give tribute to Crimson. That might not be the only motive or
intention and (without implying any criticism or censure) I would ask for
the aim to be clearly declared.
4. Do you play Crimson music, or new music "inspired by" or "influenced
by", or re-arranged Crimson music or ...?
5. There are different degrees of "tribute album". Are you aiming at a
cassette? A CD commercially marketed with global release?
6. How do you plan to record the album? ADATs are technically feasible, but
you get no immediate and personal interraction between the players.
7. How do you finance this?
8. How do you organise this? Who chooses the final tracks?
An offer: if the "tribute album" convinces me musically, DGM will
release it. But, it has to viscerally activate my organs of
response. Factors: conceptual grasp, creative leaping, spirit, executant
capacity, quality of sound. Is this local, regional, national,
international or global quality musicianship?
Please don't send me a turkey to be roasted.
You also have to figure out who gets paid, and paid what.
We are not able to process and listen to tapes submitted for the
project: someone else has to take that on. We don't have enough time to
keep up with our own current and future DGM projects.
Suggestion: once you have tracks, find someone whose opinion you
trust and who is prepared to take decisions and make choices.
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 12:09:33 -0500 (EST)
From: Marc Roemer <mir1 at troi dot cc dot rochester dot edu>
Subject: nitpicky tidbits
MR: I've read in various places a quote of Robert saying the "Breathless"
middle section is in 3/3. I think he was either misquoted or joking, and
I'm surprised Eric Tamm included it in his book. There's no such thing as
3/3 time, because there's no such thing as a one-third note. I counted it
as a repeating pattern of four measures: 11/8, 11/8, 11/8, 3/8. The last
two could be taken together as 14/8, an even measure following two odd
measures just like the main theme of "Red," 5/8, 5/8, 6/8.
RF: The signature is 13 + 13 + 13 + 3 over 8.
MR: ...when you listen to the LoG's "Heptaparaparshinokh," you will hear
the critical points.
RF: I wondered when someone would spot that.
From: charity%creighton dot edu at cs dot man dot ac dot uk
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:10:27 -0600 (CST)
Subject: a visit to the UK
CU: If Oxford University decides that I am worthy enough to study at their
Centre for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, I will be in the UK from the
end of June through the beginning of August. I would appreciate it if
anyone could notify me of any Crimson-related functions in the UK during
that time period.
RF: The only scheduled performances are of Soundscapes. These are:
Saturday 31st. May 1997 12:00 - 20:00 The Chapel, Islington
Contributions encouraged:a benefit for The Autistic Sociey
Monday - Thursday 2-5th. June Salisbury Cathedral (probably daytime)
As part of the Salisbury Festival and in aid of the Spire Appeal
Yo! Dudes ...
Date: 10 Feb 97 12:05:04 EST
From: Discipline Global Mobile <73064 dot 1470 at CompuServe dot COM>
Subject: Snipping, snapping, snorting, singing ...
Thursday 6th. February, 1997.
Snipping, snapping, snorting, singing ...
This is continuing an exchange of postings which began with Matt
Lincoln's letter in ET 327 (January 8th. 1997).
My own reply to Matt is in ET 332 (Thursday 16th. January, 1997).
Matt's "Response to Response From Robert Fripp" is in ET 333 (January
Bret Hart responds in ET 337 (January 27th, 1997). Bret's letter is
forwarded by / via Matt, so I assume they are acquainted.
This is my response to Bret.
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 13:50:43 -0500
From: Matt Lincoln <matt at argo dot net>
Subject: Forwarding letter from Bret Hart
From: Ears Hart <hipworks at ma dot ultranet dot com>
BH: 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.
RF: Firstly, if Mr. Ears is going to link my aim with Robert's response to
Matt at Merriweather it would be better to say: "in defence of Fripp's
Secondly, I am assuming the "ardent fan" Bret refers to is Matt the
Tri-Cranial, as Bret's letter is forwarded by / from Matt.
Thirdly, what happened that was sufficient to invalidate Matt's
"very existence"? What actually happened?
BH: i want to make it clear that this document is not a parody of
mr. fripp's use of the English language...
RF: Parody's fine by me, so long as it makes me laugh and gives me
insights. Or even just makes me laugh. Or gives me insights.
BH: ... it's how i talk.
RF: Oh dear.
BH: indeed, the relationship between artist and art-recipient can be most
RF: Too true.
BH: 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.
RF: I know how you feel.
BH: often, i have been busy, distracted, or en route elsewhere when these
persons initiated their communications.
RF: I know just how you feel.
BH: on at least one occasion, the physical appearance (which, then, met my
criteria for "unstable/spooky") of the approacher disinclined me to receive
RF: I really know just how you feel.
BH: i kept the interaction brief.
RF: As long as that?
BH: 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... 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
RF: That's a good line. I'll remember that one.
BH: ... 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
RF: Not necessarily. The key factor is intention, not the means or place of
For example, when a musician plays in public it seems reasonable to
assume that they have made the "conscious choice to present their art in
public", conceivably even "promote / promulgate their art in public". But I
don't see how we can jump to the conclusion - that the artist sees their
art as product, or has the intention to market it as such - simply because
the artist is "delivering" their "art" in public.
An analogy: if we see a wedding, with a happy bridegroom, how can
we know his intention or motivation? Is he getting married for love, or
money? To become a national? Or any other reasons? Do we know the
pre-nuptial agreement? All we can reasonably assume from being on the
outside looking on, is that the bridegroom has publicly affirmed his union
with the bride. We are unable to form a judgement as to the quality of the
union. If the wedding was in a church, registry office or Las Vegas
drive-thru service, might our assumptions differ?
When I buy a ticket to a public performance by a musician, I can't
make the leap of assumption, merely from the facts of the performance being
in public and Robert buying a ticket, that the musician has made the
"conscious choice to market their art as product". Perhaps the musician
plays music because of an inner imperative, and their music-making
("musicking" in Christopher Small's term) is process. ("Where we are going
is how we get there"). It says nothing of the musician's intention, or
motivation, that a part of this process takes place in public.
May I present a re-phrasing?
"When a committed artist brings and attempts to present the process
of musicking to the / their public in the form of live music, the artist
has taken the decision to present their art in public and accept
money". The key word here is "committed". Committed artists don't play for
money: they take the money for the music they play.
I'd like to add the view that making a "conscious choice" is a very
big thing. Most of our "conscious choices" have little to do with choice or
consciousness. Or so it seems to me.
BH: 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.
RF: With the reservation regarding "conscious choices", and noting that
common sense is uncommon indeed, I would agree that a performance of music
is a universe writ small.
BH: the a/e/f is responsible for treating the artist with the respect
accorded any living thing.
RF: I wish.
BH: the artist is responsible for treating the a/e/f with the respect any
person engaged in commerce should have for their meal-ticket ...
RF: Do you mean that this is a marriage for money? Cupboard love? That the
relationship between audience and performer is a trading relationship?
Personally, while I accept professional responsibilities towards
the ticket-paying members of the audience (and those who don't pay) I don't
look on them, or think of them, as my "meal-ticket". This would demean the
relationship, in my eyes, and be insulting. Turning this around, might the
musician be a meal for someone with "consumer rights"?
BH: never with contempt. no argument allowed on this.
RF: No argument offered. I don't remember feeling contempt for any
audience, or audience member (although I can remember running away from
various members of various audiences). I remember feeling disgust and
loathing for two businessmen, but I knew and accepted that the
responsibility for my feelings was mine, and unworthy. BH: if the
artist/musician is sharing the art they create with the public, and
only(*again) through cash transactions (as does mr. fripp)...
RF: How do you know that "cash transactions" are the only way I "share my
art" with the public?
BH: ... then the artist accepts this arrangement, having created and
participated in it.
RF: Actually, not. I don't accept the arrangement, I didn't create the
arrangement, certainly in the terms which BH defines, I don't like the
arrangement, and I do participate in it although with reluctance.
The "arrangement" is one form of relating, and one which is part
of, and increasingly defined by, a commercial culture. I didn't create the
music industry - although I was part of an attempt 28 years ago to
establish a fairer approach in one part of it - and I do participate in it
from time to time. It stinks. Our current (Western) notions of concert
performance date back to post-Napoleonic Europe, the collapse of patronage,
and the development of the concert tradition (with music, groupings of
musicians, the business of music, and the construction of concert halls
developing together). Similarly, the record industry today closely mirrors
the development of book publishing between 1850-1900.
A great amount of my energies are currently being put into
redefining music industry standards and norms (an aim contained within my
larger aim), in and through my tiny part of the music industry (I'm
referring to the establishment of Discipline Global Mobile) in the hope
that ripples will move outwards. I can't change the world, but maybe I can
have an effect in my own little part of the world. My own little part of
the world interracts with the larger world and, since everything we do
carries repercussions (whether we like it or not, intend it or not) if one
little world resonates with "rightness" then maybe a sympathetic resonance
will begin to sound elsewhere.
Readers of ET wondering why Robert might put quite so much time and
energy into corresponding with an Enthusiast-zine might extrapolate.
BH: if it is one's aim to sell...
RF: It isn't my aim, either as a musician or as a professional musician.
BH: ... 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
RF: Otherwise, not.
The reasoning strikes me as being upside-down. Surely for a
musician the "hat on the head of the pantheon of activity" is
musicking. Then "that which relates to one's selling must, necessarily,
become" subordinated to the process of bringing music into the world.
BH: these are the imperative considerations which place occasional**
sandwiches in the hands of artists.
RF: My own "imperative considerations" are rather different and are
discussed in some detail in the first DGM Newsletter, just about to be
posted out from DGM World Central to our mail order customers. Discipline's
business aims were recently posted in ET by my Sister (Patricia is the
Frippster) but here they are from Robert:
"The first aim of DGM is to help bring music into the world which
would otherwise be unlikely to do so, or under conditions prejudicial to
the music and / or musicians.
The second aim of DGM is to operate in the market place, while
being free of the values of the market place.
The third aim of DGM is to help the artists and staff of DGM
achieve what they wish for themselves.
The fourth aim of DGM is to find its audience.
The fifth aim of DGM is to be a model of ethical business in an
industry founded on exploitation, oiled by deceit, riven with theft and
fuelled by greed.
If a small company, which aims to be true, can succeed in the music
industry there is hope for others. We each support each other without
necessarily seeing or knowing how this might be, or when it occurs. But on
the level where things are true, this is true.
Any business will be successful if it provides its customers with
either what they want or what they need. If the public needs what it wants,
or wants what it needs, the business will be very successful. In this sense
public taste can redirect and reconstitute our business culture. There is
hope in this.
The aim is to be the right size, not the biggest size. We only have
to be as big as we need to be to serve our aims, and to operate
efficiently. That is size from our point of view. But ultimately, the size
is governed by the response of our public, which is the audience for
The formal view of Crimson Music and DGM is that business
practices, although widespread and `common practice', which seek to deprive
the creative element of its authority, and artists of the benefit of their
work, are short-sighted and immoral.
Any culture whose artists are directed or controlled by commercial
interests is in mortal danger. Any artist directed or controlled by
commercial interests is in mortal danger. Any artist willingly directed or
controlled by commercial interests is not to be trusted.
The history of the music industry is a history of exploitation and
BH: 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....
RF: Lennon was acting in accordance with time, place and person.
BH: ...in 1978, an overzealous "fan" gave me the crabs...
RF: Obviously you were born with the Social Gland.
BH: if mr. fripp's reaction to the approaching fan was based upon fear ...
RF: It wasn't.
BH: * the conscious choice of not participating in commercial art...and
devoting that time spent selling to further exploration of the muse, is
RF: Anyone generous enough to take an interest in my "career" will have
noticed that this is a recurrent feature of it.
BH: in so doing, the entire concept of "pesky audience" evaporates and
whistles out the window.
RF: No, it doesn't. An engaged audience persists in time.
BH: 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
RF: The economics of touring is an interesting subject, and worth
addressing as part of our overall debate on the professional relationship
between audience and performer, discussed by many of the ET
correspondents. But because the topic is complex, touches on ethical
conduct in business generally, King Crimson and RF in particular, probably
best to leave that for a separate posting.
BH: ... 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.
RF: So, why would those who had experienced "an epiphany" make the
approach? Why the impulse / demand "to say a few kind words"? What is the
BH: in this world, we do give strangers audience.
RF: At the right time, in the right place, to the right
strangers. Otherwise, we don't. For example, they might have crabs.
And which world is "this world"?
BH. 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?
RF: This disturbs me. The thinking is sloppy, the argument is manipulative,
the effect fundamentally dishonest.
The argument, as Bret presents it, implies that the two statements
In the first, a stranger extends themself to Fripp in what they
perceive as Fripp's best interest. Actually, Fripp might have been making a
desperate and radical attempt to eradicate hair lice, given him by a
stranger during an audience. But the general drift is that Fripp benefits
from the stranger's alert, the stranger generously and selflessly exerting
themself to / for Fripp. It is in Fripp's clear interest to listen, and
the stranger has nothing to gain.
In the second, the stranger does not extend themself to Fripp, but
demands that Fripp extend Fripp's attention to the stranger. Fripp suffers
because of it.
In the first, it is in Fripp's clear interest to listen, and the
stranger has nothing to gain.
In the second, it is in Fripp's clear interest not to listen (he
would "suffer" because of it) and the stranger has something to gain.
BH: And why not suffer through a few moments of sincere compliment?
RF: And why not?
Firstly, because these might not be the right few moments. They
might be inappropriate few moments. They might be the wrong few moments. A
very little amount of the wrong thing at the right time in the right place
can be very damaging. "You only need one prick in a balloon" - a pin is
very small, after all: why not suffer through one brief moment of poking by
Secondly, it might not be the right place.
Thirdly, it might not be the right person presenting the "few
moments of sincere compliment". What characterises the right person? They
make no demand, and have no investment, in the compliments being given or
Fourthly, suffering "a few moments of sincere compliment"
multiplied by a factor of several is one long moment of "suffering".
Fifthly, how to discriminate between a compliment and a compliment?
A compliment asks nothing for itself.
Here is an example of a few generous words of (I believe) sincere
compliment written from AD of Nottinghamshire in a letter of December 15th.
"I was ordering the Soundbites CD and I thought I would take the
opportunity of writing a few words of thanks and appreciation for the
pleasure and interest your music has given me over the last twenty-six
I learned to trust your intentions and your directions quite early in what
I think of as our relationship, and your work has never disappointed me. To
this listener, that body of work is a beautiful example of continuity and
change: nothing has been lost even though everything is in flux. This seems
to me to have a quality of secular redemption.
It is tempting to ask questions and to gossip, but that would make this letter
something different from what I intended".
1. AD only wanted to say "thank you".
2. Thank you asks nothing for itself.
3. The letter is clean, transparent, straightforward. It has no "side".
BH: *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
RF: My experience is probably different to yours. I would hope not to be
threatened, degraded or invalidated, but I'm not sure I'd expect it. And
I've been in some rough convenience stores.
BH: i would expect them to choreograph their own conduct based upon their
RF: Like running away ...
BH: ... 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.
RF: Maybe Bret, but maybe not Matt the Three Headed Beast. And we seem to
be returning to the idea of "the invalidation of existence". This continues
to interest me.
BH: 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.
RF: Alternatively, find the right time and place.
BH: 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.
RF: I'm impressed.
BH: 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.
RF: My own sense is of acquiring additional responsibilities.
BH: for example, i've never felt ethically justified, for any reason, to
invalidate a person's existence by ignoring them completely when they
RF: Once again, I find this disturbing. Once again, the thinking is sloppy
and the argument is manipulative. What Bret seems to argue is this:
Statement One: It is not ethically justifiable to invalidate a person's
Statement Two: To ignore a person's existence when they initiate a
conversation invalidates their existence.
Statement Three: Therefore to ignore a person completely when they
initiate a conversation is unethical.
The leap between Statements One and Three is the one that continues
to give me difficulty. Exactly how is a person's existence invalidated by
them being "ignored" when they initiate a conversation? What is the
process, the sequence, the mechanics of the "invalidation"?
An ethically sound basis for declining an overture to engage in
conversation, is that the conditions are inappropriate for the person
approached to respond positively. And sometimes no answer is an answer.
BH: certainly, i have truncated conversations when the moment required me
RF: We have that in common.
BH: 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
RF: The quick answer is no, yes and no. But the point deserves a better
answer involving both specifics and the generality.
The generality is that, where possible, one acts with courtesy
towards others. This is common decency in acknowledgement of our common
humanity. This is not always possible. Failing courtesy, which is an inner
and considerable grace, then we are polite. This is an outward reflection
of the inner grace, and is the assumption of virtue ("Assume a virtue if ye
have it not"). Sometimes, even politeness is not possible. The next step,
or particular strategy to adopt, in an encounter is governed by the
My own governing principle is this:
If you are unable to conduct yourself with goodwill, better not.
Any specific encounter is governed by time, place and person. So,
my conduct is determined by the particular person / s with who I am
interracting, and the conditions under which the interraction is taking
BH: why? perhaps, through word-of-mouth, somewhere down the line, i will
actually benefit from having so done.
RF: Rather than courtesy and respect for our common humanity?
BH: 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 ...
RF: Not if he reads ET...
BH: ... or be in the 'right place at the right time' in some other way.
BH: it serves no one's aim to create a hostile impression.
RF: It depends on the time, place and people involved.
Now, back to a central theme here: Bret wishes "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 note here that Bret's comments seem to rely upon Matt's view
of the exchange and that we haven't yet established (to my satisfaction
anyway) how Matt's existence was invalidated by Fripp.
The first (major) clue is in the word "perception". So, the
"invalidation" of Matt, ardent tri-cranial (possibly former) fan, is in
Matt's "perception" of the incident. This seems to be Bret's / Matt's
sequence of events:
1. Matt approached Robert and said `Excuse me I would like to say...'.
2. Robert ignored Matt.
3. Matt's very existence is invalidated.
We move from this to the perception of the event by the other
participant, Fripp the Unhuman. Robert's sequence of events is this:
Matt approached Robert and said `Excuse me I would like to say...'
and Robert ran away.
This is what happened. This is what's left when we take away our
interpretation of that simple event, and the subsequent argument, ballyhoo,
commentary, declamation, expostulation, furore, gabble, haranguing,
irritability and jeremiad kindling of lamentations.
If we add to the sequence of events the subsequent postings in ET
we get this sequence:
1. Matt approached Robert and said `Excuse me I would like to say..'.
2. Robert ran away.
3. Matt posted an angry letter in ET presenting his apology "as well giving
(Robert) the opportunity to behave like a human and apologize to me as well".
4. Robert replied presenting his apology and asking what Matt expected from
Robert, and what response he wanted from Robert.
5. Matt replied with an angry letter suggesting we "treat others as you
would want yourself treated, and be nice"; and "sometimes I guess I expect
too much from a fellow people/ person /human".
6. Bret posts his "reaction to an ardent fan's perception that mr. fripp, in
pursuit of his aim invalidated his very existence.
7. Robert replies asking how we established that Matt's existence was
invalidated by Fripp.
Although Matt has suggested in his last posting that we "treat others as
you would want yourself treated, and be nice" (this deserves a response); and
that "sometimes I guess I expect too much from a fellow people/ person /human"
(which also deserves a response), I remain unknowing as to what Matt expected,
and the response he wanted, from Fripp at Merriweather.
So Matt: what did you expect, and what response did you want, from Fripp
So Bret: how did Fripp invalidate the very existence of Matt at
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 12:31:07 -0800 (PST)
From: "Anton Swansorb" <swansorb at hotmail dot com>
Subject: A commentary on Robert Fripp's recent ET behaviour
Dear Mr. Fripp,
At first I read your contributions to Elephant Talk with great
interest. You appeared to be attempting to engage in banter with your fans
in an intelligent manner, unlike the ill-conceived, juvenile ranting and
raving that was courtesy of fellow bandmate Adrian Belew. However, you've
taken your "diatribes" and "dialogue" to an equally puzzling level.
You've started ruminating on the most minute and insignificant of fan-Fripp
interactions as if they're of mammoth importance. In fact, you're obviously
spending an unbelievable and astonishing amount of time reading ET and
You once discussed and/or believed in the "vampiric relationship between
artist and fan." But you're now demonstrating some fairly toothy behaviour
yourself. And that behaviour seems to depict a fundamental unwillingness to
acknowledge basic human tendencies and interaction models.
You've chosen to embed and obfuscate that unwillingness in
pseudo-philosophy and quixotic prose, but it's still quite obvious. You
don't seem particularly interested in generating goodwill amongst your
fans, unless it's something which directly benefits you (e.g. the upcoming
listening/ purchasing session in Britain).
And apparently, if an encounter or action takes place that violates your
personal realm, it's unacceptable, vile and demands a cold, calculating
response. I guess never once in your life have you bothered someone in a
moment that was inappropriate. That's pretty damn impressive Mr. Fripp if
it's true. High standards indeed.
I'm led to wonder if you have children Mr. Fripp. My guess is you probably
don't. Being around children provides one with a unique viewpoint on adult
behaviour. No matter how "civilized" or "evolved" we believe we've become
in our later years, certain behavioural tendencies never completely
disappear. The overzealous behaviour some of your fans have displayed is a
perfect example. It's truly nothing to get hyper, concerned or
So, relax. Consider offering a smile instead of a grimace. Consider
choosing to calmly explain your frame of mind to the offending person
rather than act offended and disgusted. No, there is no obligation on your
part to do so. But you'll only enhance your frame of mind and that of the
offending party if you take that path.
swansorb at hotmail dot com
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 23:02:25 -0500 (EST)
From: agower at netcom dot ca
Subject: Bruford CD for trade
I unfortunately screwed up a recent order to Possible Productions. I got
Bruford Earthworks album "All Heaven Broke Loose". I meant to order his
live "Stamping Ground". This CD is still in its original wrapping. I want
to trade for some other KC affiliated artist or any other artist for that
matter. I am in Vancouver, Canada so the closer you are the better! E-mail
me privately ASAP if interested.
agower at netcom dot ca
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 01:13:02 -0600 (CST)
From: joebeats at ix dot netcom dot com (Lou Levinson )
I've been a bit caught up in the daily machinations of life, and
never got around to properly responding to the proffered questions. Still,
something I saw in a response to a response (2nd derivative) made me stop
and pause. The problem with timeless moments of creation, is that they're
timeless. A regression problem raises its head. Personally, I think that
as an artist of whatever chosen medium, one must recognize the seemimgly
egocentric necessities that surround the creative moment for the inner
voyage/learning that they are. All questions of an external nature loose
meaning except as we the artists have carried a reflection of the external
world with us. Even in the musical and artistic endeavors that have been
group performance efforts that I have embarked upon and have been lucky
enough to achieve this moment of timelessness, I still felt alone ,albeit
comfortably, and what accompanied me into my personal space was a
reflection of my coperformers. It did seem that I could tell when they lost
themselves, and vice versa, but a distinctness remained nonetheless.
I think where I was taking this was that there are those out here
who have felt a glimpse of Your journey, because it somehow resonates
with ours. Asking us what we like or we think isn't really the point.
Your timeless moments will take you to the places it does. We'll feel
the truth of the resonance.
Date: 11 Feb 1997 09:24:29 -0500
From: "Jonathan Block" <jonathan dot block at gartner dot com>
Subject: RE- SScapes and Music Value
DR. D wrote about soundscapes on a budget:
>>Can anyone give me information about this set up or point me in the right
direction to solve my problems?<<
The cassette decks need to have separate record and playback heads. It also
helps if they have microphone inputs, not just the RCA jacks in the back. You
could also go to some pawn shops or garage sales; I've seen many reel-to-reel
decks for cheap (less than $50). Either way you'll need a mixing board. A
good alternative is the Lexicon JamMan, which comes with 8 seconds of delay
on board. It's not particularly high-end, but is effective, you can add more
memory and it costs about $300. Actually, the cheapest alternative is to use
the delay unit you already have. Crank the delay time to the maximum and open
up the feedback (or regeneration) control until you get the effect you're
And, Mark Fenkner on the value of music:
>>For the past two years I have often wondered what was the true value in
music, and if there was value in music, if I could benefit from it....etc. To
all of the people on this list that still are avid music enthusiasts, what is
the value of music to you? etc. etc. etc.<<
I hear what you're saying. I can't really articulate this, but as a musician
when I get in states like this I find that if I can quiet my mind and
emotions just a little I'm driven by some necessity to carry on, especially
when I don't want to, by trying to keep a task (however small) in front of
me. Whether it be working on a new piece of music, refining an older piece or
preparing for a gig. I can, however, be more articulate on some of you're
>>Not only was I singing those sad song after my girlfriend broke up with
me, but I was also imagining that I was playing for a crowd of people that
adored me and thought me tragic.<<
Yes, I have also been a jolted and misuderstood lover, wrote many sad songs,
and learned way too many Peter Hammill tuness. The cure -- albeit
unintentional -- was playing this stuff live. The crowd never adored me, nor
found me tragic; they talked a lot.
>>Now, I only occasionally buy CDs for the sake of collecting (Fripp's
mostly), and I almost never listen to the hundreds that I own.<<
This works for me: Sell the CDs. There's been nothing more liberating than
selling hundreds of CDs I never really listened too, reminded me of darker
times or just bought for one tune. Besides, the money comes in handy.
>>It seems that listening to music is quite pointless and probably
detrimental. To all of the people on this list that still are avid music
enthusiasts, what is the value of music to you? Does it serve any
constructive function in our lives? <<
There's still a lot of music that fires me up to do my own thing and gives me
From: kay_sahagian at mail dot systemone dot com (kay_sahagian)
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 09:51:25 -0500
Subject: KC: The Movie and 3D Moments
I begin to see "KC: The Movie" coming to fruition more clearly. And
the way I see it, RF can only be played by Steven Seagall. Here is a
SCENE: The Soundboard at any theater in the US, about 60 minutes
before a KC gig. RF is preparing himself, focusing upon his
forthcoming contributions to the triad of Music, Musicians, and
Audience, in hopes that the three cohere into a Moment.
ENTER Randall from the House of Blues (R-HOB), and the Three Headed
THB: Excuse me...
RF takes ACTION. Cue sound effects, explosions as necessary to create
a scene of explicit and unrelenting violence:
BOOM! THRAK! SMASH! POW! BLEED! CRASH!
R-HOB & THB (lying in pool of assorted bodily goos and organs)
RF (wiping hands): As you can see, my response indicates that this is
NOT the time or place.
R-HOB: oooh..err..arrgh..oww..but we were just looking for the
END OF SCENE
My little attempt at humor does bring me to another concept for
ongoing chewing in ET:
With Robert Fripp's posts, and our reponses to his questions on
expectations and responsibilities, it seems clear that all of us,
enthusiasts coming together as an audience, as well as the band, have
responsibilities toward the Music as well as other responsibilities
(many have mentioned "be nice to your neighbor"). It seems to me that
there IS a triad, of Music, Audience, and Musicians that can cohere to
make a Moment, and I wonder if a Moment can exist with only 1 or 2 of
the elements of the triad. It's as if the Music exists, in its own
dimension, and Musicians, with aim and effort, can coax the music into
a two-dimensional state, one that exists in the studio, or on record.
This leads me to believe that an audience, also with aim and effort,
adds the vital third dimension, if you will, and that now a Moment can
exist, in 3-D.
If a Moment can exist only in 3-D, when the conditions of the triad
are met, then any recording, bootleg of an official or unofficial
nature, can only be an attempt to capture a Moment, which cannot be
done, since the Moment can only exist in 3-D. And even then, they
don't exist very often. All the stars have to line up. Official
bootlegs then appeal to me much more than unofficial bootlegs because
official bootlegs are closest to capturing the intact components of
the Moment that existed: the Music existed, the Audience had aim and
effort, and the Musicians had aim and effort as well. The producers
of the official recording have a wider range of musical moments where
the aim and effort of the Audience and Musicians is present and
adequate from which to select, and where care is taken so that the
recording was done with the aim of accurately documenting the Music in
terms of sound reproduction.
Unofficial bootlegs suffer from faulty triad components: the Audience
or Musicians may not have had sufficient aim or effort, and since the
recording was done surreptitiously, it is more likely that one or more
of the components of the Moment triad has broken down. And since the
unofficial bootleg is a "one-shot", furtive deal, the odds that the
performance cohered into a Moment even worth trying to capture are
It isn't my intent here to promote or denigrate the unofficial
bootlegging process, or define "right or wrong". I am merely trying
to explain my interest in official bootlegs and disinterest in
unofficial ones. Thank you for reading all this.
kay_sahagian at systemone dot com
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 14:06:50 -0500
From: "Hickson, Robert [PRI]" <RHICKSON at RARUSRAEXS1 dot prius dot jnj dot com>
Subject: One Moment of Music
In the ET 339, during a discussion concerning the moment of the music,
Robert Fripp wrote:
"Other performers, perhaps less naturally gifted, may nevertheless
be sensitive to the energies involved. It is quite possible to sense the
"envelope" of energy surrounding, containing, protecting the
performance. Some people can even see it: something like an aura writ
large. Probably, most ET contributors have experienced this and would be
able to describe it, in their own form of words, if they examined their
experience of their most moving / powerful / intense performances (some
which they may not have "liked" at all)."
I suspect this could help to explain a recent experience. I went to a
live performance of Iannis Xenakis' "Kraanurg", a modern classical
symphony for live orchestra and treated tape. At times the orchestra
would play alone, or the tape would play alone, or they would briefly
play together - or there would be silence. It is not an "easy" listen -
it takes some discipline to listen through this 70+ minute piece. I
enjoyed the performance - but realized that my discipline had faltered
and there was more there.
I went to a second performance of "Kraanurg" a week later. The same
symphony, the same orchestra, the same audient - completely different
experience. On that night, the live orchestra was...live - in the
moment I guess. The treated tape was more like a representation of
another moment - another time, another place. They resembled each
other, yet were completely different. But the SILENT moments! I was
absolutely crushed by the moments of silence! Performers and audience
together during the moments of silence - it was the most powerful music
I have ever experienced. I was alone with the music - my thoughts were
the music - I couldn't breathe for fear of losing that moment. The
feelings of being so intimate with the music were a mixture of ecstasy
and terror. Ecstasy because of the simple beauty of that moment, terror
because of the absolute truth.
Do I like "Kraanurg"? I don't know. But I will never forget it.
From: Matt Walsh <MATTW at smginc dot com>
Subject: 6 degrees of separation.
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 97 14:13:00 PST
I've always thought the 6 degrees of separation was rather interesting
(anyone who's played the now famous Kevin Bacon game knows that it is
pretty much impossible to break the link).
The six degrees of separation on here have been pretty much simple. Why
don't we try the extremes? How about connecting King Crimson with
grindcore death metal band Napalm Death. Scary... it's simple...
Former Napalm Death drummer Mick Harris was also in the psychotic
metal-jazz band Painkiller. Painkiller's bassist, Bill Laswell, has
worked with just about everybody, one of them being Brian Eno and David
Byrne on "My Life In The Bush Of Ghosts", so you can continue the
connection with Fripp or Belew.
OK, want even scarier? How about noise band A.C. (I will spare you from
spelling out what it stands for).
A.C.'s "40 More Reasons To Hate Us" album had guest vocals from Phil
Anselmo of the band Pantera. Pantera was the backing band for Rob
Halford's single "Life Comes Out Of Black". Rob Halford was a brief
member of Black Sabbath, whose album "Sabbath Bloody Sabbath" featured
the keyboards of Rick Wakeman. Wakeman->Bruford (obviously).
I think if AC can be connected to King Crimson, any band that has ever
existed can. Anyway, unless objected by Toby, how about some other
extremely bizarre connections?
mattw at smginc dot com
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 14:29:20 EST
From: "Todd Bernhardt" <tbernha at columbiaenergy dot e-mail dot com>
Subject: Two things. No, make that three.
Greetings, foolish mortals (meaning everyone on the list except for Fripp
the guitar God):
I'll keep this brief since you folks DO like to go on so...
On the thread of KC doing covers: I'd love to hear the double trio cover
Travels in Nihilon, from XTC's "Black Sea" album. KC is the only band that
could make that song darker than it already is.
To the gentleman who asked why we listen to music: Personally, I listen to
music as a way of getting outside myself. Paradoxically, it also teaches me
things about myself that I would not have otherwise seen. Go figure.
And to the Great Roberto: I don't want to make you suffer through a moment
of sincere compliment, but your posts are a hoot and right on the money.
Keep 'em coming.
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 14:43:00 -0500
From: Thom Smith <SmithT at cpcuiia dot org>
Subject: The Insatiable Appetite for KC (and RF)
"We do not fear being called meticulous, inclining as we do to the view that
only the exhaustive can be truly interesting."
-Thomas Mann, _The Magic Mountain_
And there you have it. Crimson is one of the last bastions of this type of
artist and enthusiast relationship. And even for moderate enthusiasts like
myself, often fanaticism can border on hysteria, or even indiscipline. Take
a good listen to the lyrics of that song. Do not we all feel that way when
we encounter KC contraband. We usually throw ethics to the wind just to see
what else is out there, sometimes spending $25 on something unheard only to
say, "Eah, okay." I did just that last week. Of course, the commercialism of
the producers of the bootleg was clear when I heard "Elephant Talk" start
playing when the cover clearly said "The Talking Drum." Well, they got the
"talk" bit right anyway.
I don't think any band has been intellectualized as much as KC. Add to this
the fact that its founder is himself a highly articulate, if pedantic (well,
he is a teacher!), vocalizer. And the many of us who respond to RF, please
take many of his posts cum grano salis. The man is an ironist and a satirist
first and foremost, both in his music and in his writings. This is not to
belittle his thinking. In the process of his writing, he is often profound
and usually right. But the writing itself is the invention, and RF needs to
write a bit first and then he gets going and the ideas take over. Isn't that
a lot like the musical improvisation that the band does, and don't they
not-quite-get-it-right sometimes, too?
We all are possessive of our heros and their greatness as artists. But
artists, as much as they may try to understand their own creations, cannot
explain their artistic life to their own or our own satisfaction. RF is
trying to come to grips with this from OUR perspective in order to help us
understand the phenomenon of being a CELEBRITY. But we will never really
understand, because we are HUNGRY. We have insatiable appetites, and the
wealth of information out there, especially after what the revolution of the
Internet brings us, is still not enough---or at least it does not entirely
But RF finds himself at the right place and the right time now to converse
with us and "apologize" in the Socratic sense. For this, I appreciate his
comments and am happy to be here at the right time and place, too.
Thankfully, the Internet allows this "intimacy" for many more people, but we
must also respect the boundaries that still exist. RF proposed this problem
in his "global" discussion; he's right, casual comments are more easily
public property now. But even if we understand, I doubt that this
information > knowledge > wisdom will change our behavior. Crimheads
are hard-wired. And, inevitably, RF's point might > may > will be missed
by us when one of the Team approaches him at the next concert just waiting
to say, "Uh, excuse me, but I just wanted to thank you for all your comments
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 15:22:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Steven Sullivan <sullivan at gwis2 dot circ dot gwu dot edu>
Subject: an official boot I'd like to see
I'd like to second the call for the famous COncertgebouw concert to be
released as an official 'bootleg, with the tracks from S&BB intact. I've
always thought the version of Talking Drum/LTiAII here were the among the
oh, yeah, and 'USA' (with remixes retained, please) too.
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 21:35:59 +0100 (MET)
From: Arato Andras <jzb3101 at stud dot u-szeged dot hu>
Subject: Re: Mr Kozak's Fripp
IN ET number 343 Mr Kozak wrote to RF:
SHUT UP AND PLAY YOUR GUITAR
He is quite right and I'd like to say to the ET readers and KC listeners
SHUT UP AND LISTEN TO RF & KC
I haven't been reading ET for a long time and for the first time I found
it interesting, and I could learn some new info about the band.
Later on ET became more and more boring. Some people are writing kbytes
about how disgusting it was to meet with Fripp, while others (at same
length) are saying how nice he is. In some issues mr Fripp himself is
writing books about what he is like and why he is like that.
To me it it seems that it gives them the satisfaction, but I don' know why.
There is a man existing on Planet Earth, accidentally named Robert Fripp.
I think he' got his own home, makes his breakfast, drinks his tea or
equivalent, watches movies of his own taste, goes to the tiolet regularly
and sleeps at night ( am I mistaken Mr Fripp?). Just like anyone else.
there is nothing to talk about this guy. Then there is the other one who
plays the guitar on the stage and on CD-s. Could we manage to have these
two guys stay different.
And just questions. Could anyone tell me how a university student in
Eastern Europe can buy the KC CD-s (official or any other)? I myself
borrow them and get it on tape (don't even have the money for a
CDplayer). What do you think about that Mr Fripp?
Subject: Fripp books?
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 97 15:41:39 -0500
From: Dave Anastasi <daanasta at student dot berklee dot edu>
To Mr. Robert Fripp & Fellow ETers:
I myself am a musician and composer at Berklee College of Music, and have
always been very interested in reading about Robert's views regarding
performance, audiences, and music listening and appreciation. I also see
myself in his views. Has he ever written any books that I could get my
hands on? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
From: Charles Jowett <jowett_charles at waters dot com>
Subject: Bootlegs and Meeting Mr. Fripp
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 15:53:36 -0500
Some thoughts on boot legging...
(I appologize in advance for not being able to articulate my ideas as
clearly as Mr. Fripp)
Many years ago a friend and I smuggled a tape recorder into a King Crimson
concert. The act of recording the concert severely disrupted my
appreciation of the event. I became more involved with worrying about the
tape than listening to the music (How are the levels? I wish that guy
would shut up, he's ruining my tape. Has my tape recorder been spotted by
that nasty looking roadie? I better not cheer, it'll come out on the
tape.) In short, I never became caught up in the moment. I remained
detached from the music and even the most brilliant performance would have
been lost on me.
Some thoughts Meeting Mr. Fripp...
Why would I want to? I have enjoyed some of his musical output over the
years and attended a few of his concerts but I don't see how meeting him
could add to my listening experience. Would his autograph make
"Discipline" an even more fantastic record? Whether Mr. Fripp is the
worlds' biggest dweeb/dork/pratt or the coolest dude outside of Nirvana is
completely irrelevant. It is the music that counts.
I am a software engineer. If someone came up to me in a bar and started
babbling about how they loved my design of a certain mutlithreaded
real-time control process I would certainly beat a hasty retreat.
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 16:01:50 -0500
From: alan s cohen <i000371 at disch3 dot disc dot dla dot mil>
Subject: Re: from Robert Fripp
>J.O. First a question. Does anyone know what became of the U.K. project
>that was suppose to feature Wetton, Jobson, Fripp and an occasional
>RF: I was never involved in this. While Crimson were playing at the
>Longacre in New York Eddie and John asked me to play a session for the
For some reason I'm really surprised to see an answer to a question like
this. So I'll ask my own. Whatever happened to the Fripp and Eno
collaberation which was being recorded back in '93. I can remember some
quotes about it in "Guitar Player" mag where Fripp refered to it as a dance
album and was saying that Eno can actually play his instruments a bit
now. Perhaps we'll hear this on "The Essential Fripp and Eno 2", to be
released in the year 2010. (Shall I explain that "Healthy Colours" was
released after 17 years on "The Essential..." compilation?)
>RF: You can't capture Crimson, or anyone else, live (for either prosperity
>or posterity). We can't capture life: we live it, in the moment. That's all
>there is. This is something like the different natures of a literate and
>oral / aural society. Both have their value, both are very different ways
>of experiencing, perceiving and living.
> If we try to capture the moment, the moment escapes us. This is a
>key principle. When we are present in the moment, our experience of time
>changes. Then, our experience of the event changes. Then, the event itself
I have to admit I have trouble passing up a good bootleg (sorry
Robert). But I had an experience a couple of years ago while on vacation in
Prince Edward Island (incredible place) which helped me understand the
problem of trying to capture the moment. I was hiking somewhere trying to
get a picture of practically everything (It's that kind of place-
everything begs for a picture). So after a while of walking and stopping
to take pictures, I realized that in an effort to capture the island on
film, I wasn't experiencing being there at that moment. Capturing the
memory was becoming more important than experiencing the moment. So I just
sat and experienced being there for a while. And then took some more
pictures. Is this contradictory?
So I understand the point, but it's hard to not want to experience something
as good as the Philadelphia concert was last summer.
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 16:48:32 -0500
From: scruto19 at potsdam dot edu (Bolts of Ungodly Vision)
Subject: Why I never want to meet Robert Fripp
My subject is very well chosen and not meant to be a mean-spirited attack
upon the person we know as Robert Fripp. Rather, its a statement of
something a tad different which goes something like this:
1. I don't feel the compelled to say "thank you." By the very fact that I
do actively seek out albums of his numerous musical ventures and that I
raised enough interest to buy the first Fripp related release, I feel this
tacitly thanks the performers for creating something of interest which is
capable of constructively occupying my waking thoughts (as in dissecting
the various parts being played,etc.), providing a medium for creative air
(insert instrument name here) playing and being able to say "I dig that
scene." If anything, the audience member should thank his or her self for
having the fortune of finding and really appreciating what the performers
thought would make a "fine little LP."
2. I honestly don't feel that it is probable I'd ever enter into a
situation in which both persons (myself and Fripp (or any other musician I
happen to be impreessed by)) are able to have a good discussion outside of
the rather oppressive and jubilant atmosphere of a concert. The fact that
the artist(s) has/have decided that a tour might be a fun thing to do,
coupled with the idea that a tour going through my home town would be a fun
thing to do, says a lot: the performer(persumeably) wants to share the
experience of what it was like to flesh out the LP that is being promoted
by the tour (or not in many cases) as well as what it's like playing that
particular type of music in general. If I had my druthers, being able to
meet Fripp would be under optimal conditions of myself and Fripp both
wanting to chat for a bit. The chances of that happening are unlikely,
namely because I never seem to be around when concerts do raise their ugly
head in my neighborhood and that my ability to slither around a crowd in
order to get to a point of possible communication with the artist is as
effective as a man who can't swim trying to cross the English Channel. So
it is important to be realistic in these dealing with hypothetical
3. Seeking out Fripp (or anyone in that matter) from such a non-personal
standpoint of "audience member at large," in the hopes of conversing,
imposes too many bothersome concepts to be accounted for. I don't like to
think of myself as a fan/enthusiast of KC/Fripp/etc. because it's not who
I am. If I want to talk to somebody, I'd do it in a less combative
situation (combat in that every other fan typically wants to get
autographs,pictures,a word or two from the artist during an instance where
an abundance of "fans" are in the same places as the person they're a fan
of...that and such situations might not be the most comfortable to begin
with for the person "in the spotlight"). I'm just Jason Scruton, a fellow
who happens to be very enthusiastic about a way of playing-no more no less.
In conclusion (so as to make my little treatise of opinion as officious and
academic as possible :)), meeting and talking with (not just to) Fripp
would be a nice and constructive thing to have happen in my life, but it's
not on my list of burning musical appreciation priorities...listening and
learning from the recorded and live output will suffice nicely. After all,
the music is Fripp's/KC primary tool of communicating with the audience (or
just expressing what he/they think sounds like a "hot tune"), so I might as
well use and enjoy it to its fullest potential.