- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
into righteousness against an imputed righteousness, brightstar65? --
"I like poetry
there are lots of good poets.
"I come from the school of thought that a good artist is knowable by others, or at least there is some gleaning of genius available to almost ANYONE with some basic, cursory knowledge of the medium."
Two points:
There is an at-least-equal school of thought which holds that the artist is irrelevant to the work of art. That it is the insecurity of the voyueristic observer of the art who insists upon knowing what the artist is about, and the specific intention of this or that piece -- that there must be an intention -- in order to bring the work of art down to the size of the voyueristic's impoverished imagination.
How does a non-genius come to have so huge an ego as to be unquestingly certain that s/he is able to recognize genius, let alone fathom it?
Do you actully know anything about poetry -- and the academic argument that songs are not and cannot be poetry?
The stumbling continues:
"A second school of thought is more about 'status', so that even those who know a lot about the art may not be in on the supposed artistry of some specific artist. Indeed it becomes a nested Russian doll collection of initiates inside initiates. Til you reach the inner initiate who is so pure, so perfect that only he or she TRUUUULY understands that this artist is a genius in ways only he or she understands.
It is thus a sophomoric power play and you have to take people's word that the artist they worship is so INCREDIAWESOME!!! !! ! If only YOU, you simp, were skilled enough to understand."
Most bobby d. fans don't confuse their projections for bobby d. Most jealous anti-bobby d. folks aren't able to distinguish between the two phenomena.
Stumbling on --
"Basically, this second school of thought is a JOKE. an IN joke, a joke on the initiates, and a joke on anyone willing to take them seriously.
The kind of joke similar to when a Buddhist stares at a grain of sand until that grain of sand contains ALL the secrets to the universe. BUT ONLY TO THAT BUDDHIST experiencing it at that time. Most people then grow up, once they get out of high school and quit the pot."
Are you questioning the authenticity of that Buddhist's putatively subjective state, and the possibility that that may be a more accurate conception of truth than yours, without the evidence of actually witnessing and experiencing that state? Do you, in short, know better than that Buddhist the experience and insight of that Buddhist?
"In the first school of thought, Springsteen is almost universally acknowledged as a genius, by those who know something about rock music."
Actually he isn't -- except by those who came after the firt generation of bobby d. fans, and who, in jealousy, decided to be angry twits by deliberately choosing a second-rate bobby d. knockoff who was made possible by bobby d.
"But, unlike BD, he is not inaccesible to most people."
Wholly irrelevant: you're like the Newport 1965 folkies who falsely believed they owned bobby d., and that he therefore must obey their dictates. Because a genuine artist -- I wouldn't pretend that I, not being a genius, would nonetheless be able to recognize genius -- he refused to be chained and straightjacketed by that set of bigots.
"You need only hear Born to Run to comprehend that this was a genius at his best."
And how long ago was that? 1975-76? And he did nothing before, and has done nothing since, worthy of mention. Oh, right, there's the tribute to Woodie Guthrie -- as he again copy-cats bobby d. -- in which the multimillionaire Springsteen dresses down to pretend his solidarity with the underdog working poor.
"Who really cares, [PR], all is phony".
"I can, on the other hand, listen to BD songs for months or years (til my face falls off) and still not understand if there is a THERE there."
That is your limitation, as there need not be any "there" there: art is unbounded by the materialists who refuse to -- or worse, cannot -- appreciate art when their demand that they be given access to the artist's private life is treated as the extraneous irrlevancy it is. bobby d. ain't Springsteen; but Springsteen ain't no actual bobby d.
"Sorry, but the "I know better than you, and you are a simp" school of artist worship is crap and always will be."
It isn't about the artist, or "artist worship" -- except in your case, with Springsteen. It's about the art.
