easycure

As for your strictly musical note, by now you should understand that the exaggerated technicality is just one component of my criticism of DT: what interests me overall is their approach that is completely committed to an inexpressive citationism that denies the concept of originality. This results in the technicality of certain tracks and/or sections, but also in the shocking banality (from my point of view, obviously) of their more communicative excursions.

That’s why I’m very surprised by your lack of objectivity when you claim that I would repeat the same old, worn-out concepts: aside from the fact that this isn't true, if the discussion is worthy of note (I’m still referring to the exchange with Fred), you haven’t evidently noticed that those who criticize my positions, whether in a more or less offensive and/or completely a priori manner (and the last posts are full of a priorism), even when in a "normal" way, repeat 99.9% of the time the same identical trivial, trite, superficial concepts. How could I respond differently to the same trivial criticisms? As I’ve already told you, and as is clearly visible, when the discussion has been constructive, my positions have also changed.. that the direction of their change hasn’t shifted was one of the plausible consequences, but they have changed nonetheless, and I think I can assert that they have also evolved. But then, where are all these trite and worn-out concepts? It’s obvious that there are many repetitions in my responses out of a total of 2000 comments.. but I don’t know if you’ve noticed, evidently not, how many literally IDENTICAL phrases have been posted by many of the DT fans here.

..but then, if as you yourself stated, I am doing well and it’s normal for me to respond to insults, I don’t see what you could cling to for your analysis of my "angry outbursts".. since apart from the insults mentioned above, since you left the discussion, there has really been very little and nothing.. who would have shown deep musical knowledge? who would have demonstrated culture (apart from, I repeat, the interesting note from that "Fred")?

well, and still well, Orion... :-) those who insulted me for my (alleged) extreme position simply insulted me, and that’s that. That’s the point. And I responded to the insults. It doesn’t seem to me there’s anything simpler or more logical. Of course my motivations are debatable; they are debatable because they are personal, as is obvious, but I have never claimed otherwise... but then how was it with you? let’s talk about it.. I don’t see anything transcendental in this either; I’d say it’s very logical.. yet it doesn’t seem to have been the case with the recent posts, where aside from the guy Fred, with whom we indeed had a perfectly normal and constructive exchange of opinions (and I really don’t understand how you can see my possible "outburst" in this exchange; I really don’t get it), I only dealt with pathetic and nonsensical collections of idiocy, to which I see no way I could have responded other than I did :-)

(continuing shortly)

Well, Orion... you show up out of nowhere after like a month of not commenting here and analyze my last comment (or my last comments) as if you had always been involved. :-) It's quite strange, for example, that you say I'm here to vent, when with you it was a long discussion, at times heated, but definitely interesting (it didn't change my mind, but it surely evolved my perspective, which seems pretty significant to me. After all, there are many ways and directions to evolve through discussion, don't you think?)

well, thank you! :-)

I honestly don't understand why "the quality is such that it renders any criticism insignificant." Their lack of poetic sensibility is proportional to the sloppiness of their stylistic intuition... a real mockery in group form (to my personal taste, of course)... the review seems a bit pretentious to me, remaining defensive as if anticipating this kind of criticism.

Well, thank goodness Seattle overwhelmed them :-) well-written review and from your point of view, it makes perfect sense.

Well then, just as you express an opinion (which is also a judgment about me), I express an opinion regarding your opinion, and I say that it is completely illogical, forced, and a priori. In other words, you claim that my stance is prejudicial: false, for the reasons already stated above. You say that my judgments are a priori: false and completely unfounded; in fact, you don't even provide examples of these hypothetical a priori judgments. Your opinion is therefore quite stupid and offensive. Is that better for you? :-D