• Suck fairy subtypes?

    From Joel Polowin@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 9 02:14:44 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    I'm familiar with the work of the "suck fairy", who notionally visits
    artistic works one enjoyed many years earlier and adds "suckiness" so
    that they later seem dire. Sometimes it's the result of a changing
    personal viewpoint -- with more maturity and breadth of experience, one
    can see flaws to which one was blind. Sometimes it comes from changes
    in social mores and customs; attitudes towards minorities, women, etc.
    become very dated, and even a work which was progressive for its time
    can later seem painful.

    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
    Sometimes it's later discovered that the creator had some pretty awful behaviour in secret (Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Cosby). Sometimes an
    artist changes over time and becomes an awful person (Orson Scott Card,
    Scott Adams), which usually results in later works becoming problematic
    even if the earlier ones are otherwise generally okay.

    Joel

    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
    www.avg.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Charles Packer@21:1/5 to Joel Polowin on Sun Apr 9 07:46:58 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:

    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?

    Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
    the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
    fade away before a term is invented.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joel Polowin@21:1/5 to Charles Packer on Sun Apr 9 15:10:43 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On 2023-04-09 3:46 AM, Charles Packer wrote:
    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:
    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
    Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
    the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
    fade away before a term is invented.

    I think that it isn't remotely plausible to call it a "fad". People
    have been critical of works of art because of the artists' behaviour for
    a *long* time. I'm not even convinced that it's much more common now
    than in the past.

    Joel

    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
    www.avg.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scott Dorsey@21:1/5 to jpolowin@sympatico.ca on Sun Apr 9 19:27:22 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    Joel Polowin <jpolowin@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    On 2023-04-09 3:46 AM, Charles Packer wrote:
    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:
    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
    Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
    the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
    fade away before a term is invented.

    I think that it isn't remotely plausible to call it a "fad". People
    have been critical of works of art because of the artists' behaviour for
    a *long* time. I'm not even convinced that it's much more common now
    than in the past.

    It's all the fault of Constantine. Between him and Savonarola it's a wonder there's anything left.
    --scott

    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Johnston@21:1/5 to Charles Packer on Sun Apr 9 21:14:20 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On 2023-04-09 1:46 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:

    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?

    Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
    the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
    fade away before a term is invented.


    The ghost of Fatty Arbuckle would like to have a word with you about how
    it's a "fad". The ghost of Rock Hudson would too, except it seems to be trapped in a closet. And neither of them were complicit in rape.

    Whether an artist's peccadilloes actually damage their art depends on
    both what the peccadilloes are and the nature of the art. For example Lovecraft's "peccadilloes" don't spoil people's enjoyment of his art
    that much because because they come as no surprise. Lovecraft's brand
    is neurotic xenophobia and so learning that manifested in the form of
    racism isn't that offputting.

    Then you look at Bill Cosby, where his art is about him being cuddly and nonthreatening and traditional values oriented, it just doesn't come
    across so effectively when you know that you're looking at a guy who was
    into sticking his dick into drugged unconscious women. Or you read
    Marion Zimmer Bradley whose image was "maternal feminist". But now when
    you notice that she repeatedly used the idea of some kind of mating
    season to undermine sexual volition or that time she wrote about a
    boarding school teacher who was sexxoring his students and the problem
    with that was not the molestation of boys under his care... Well her
    being married to a child molester casts elements of her work into a new
    light.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Charles Packer@21:1/5 to Joel Polowin on Mon Apr 10 07:51:06 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 15:10:43 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:

    On 2023-04-09 3:46 AM, Charles Packer wrote:
    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:
    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its
    creator?
    Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating the work of
    artists on account of personal peccadilloes will fade away before a
    term is invented.

    I think that it isn't remotely plausible to call it a "fad". People
    have been critical of works of art because of the artists' behaviour for
    a *long* time. I'm not even convinced that it's much more common now
    than in the past.

    Joel

    I've been a reader of reviews in newspapers for 50 years --
    of literature, art and music, and I'll say again that it's a
    fad. Or you could call it "critical reassessment" or you could
    call it self-flagellation by the chattering classes. Whatever.
    But it's most certainly a thing in the past decade.
    Here's an example just yesterday in the Washington Post:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2023/04/03/pablo- picasso-death-anniversary/

    The game to play with a review like this is to know that the
    headline signals that there's an Easter egg of sorts to be found.
    Then you try to guess how many paragraphs into it you'll find
    it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gary McGath@21:1/5 to David Johnston on Mon Apr 10 06:25:19 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On 4/9/23 11:14 PM, David Johnston wrote:
    On 2023-04-09 1:46 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:

    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?

    Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
    the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
    fade away before a term is invented.


    The ghost of Fatty Arbuckle would like to have a word with you about how
    it's a "fad".  The ghost of Rock Hudson would too, except it seems to be trapped in a closet.  And neither of them were complicit in rape.

    Whether an artist's peccadilloes actually damage their art depends on
    both what the peccadilloes are and the nature of the art.  For example Lovecraft's "peccadilloes" don't spoil people's enjoyment of his art
    that much because because they come as no surprise.  Lovecraft's brand
    is neurotic xenophobia and so learning that manifested in the form of
    racism isn't that offputting.


    Many Jews avoid Wagner because of his antisemitism, mostly focusing on
    his essay "Judentum in der Musik." It was nasty but not really unusual
    for Germans of the period; he put into writing what most Germans didn't
    express in as public and permanent a form. It didn't help his historical reputation that the Nazis adopted him so enthusiastically.

    The conductor Herbert von Karajan, who actually joined the Nazis, hasn't suffered much long-term harm to his reputation.

    Should Wagner's writings affect people's responses to his operas? Most
    people don't think so, but some are adamant about it. I discussed the
    question in my "Wagner and Nazism":

    https://oll.libertyfund.org/reading_room/2023-03-02-mcgath-wagner-and-nazism



    --
    Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ted Nolan @21:1/5 to psperson@old.netcom.invalid on Mon Apr 10 16:08:57 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    In article <qhc83i9h2rl02c14bir72hq0baq8gld48k@4ax.com>,
    Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
    On Mon, 10 Apr 2023 06:25:19 -0400, Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/9/23 11:14 PM, David Johnston wrote:
    On 2023-04-09 1:46 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:

    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with >>>>> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator? >>>>
    Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
    the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
    fade away before a term is invented.


    The ghost of Fatty Arbuckle would like to have a word with you about how >>> it's a "fad". The ghost of Rock Hudson would too, except it seems to be >>> trapped in a closet. And neither of them were complicit in rape.

    Whether an artist's peccadilloes actually damage their art depends on
    both what the peccadilloes are and the nature of the art. For example
    Lovecraft's "peccadilloes" don't spoil people's enjoyment of his art
    that much because because they come as no surprise. Lovecraft's brand
    is neurotic xenophobia and so learning that manifested in the form of
    racism isn't that offputting.


    Many Jews avoid Wagner because of his antisemitism, mostly focusing on
    his essay "Judentum in der Musik." It was nasty but not really unusual
    for Germans of the period; he put into writing what most Germans didn't >>express in as public and permanent a form. It didn't help his historical >>reputation that the Nazis adopted him so enthusiastically.

    The conductor Herbert von Karajan, who actually joined the Nazis, hasn't >>suffered much long-term harm to his reputation.

    Should Wagner's writings affect people's responses to his operas? Most >>people don't think so, but some are adamant about it. I discussed the >>question in my "Wagner and Nazism":
    https://oll.libertyfund.org/reading_room/2023-03-02-mcgath-wagner-and-nazism

    One thing I'll say for Wagner -- his Ring series inspired one heck of
    good bit by Anna Russell. But then, so did Verdi's operas based on >Shakespeare's plays.

    I did hear the Ring once. This was four-LP set which turned out to be
    mono because it was recorded from 78RPM records (you could here it
    when the switched the original disks). The summary ended all
    enthusiasm: it starts with mythology -- and ends up with Peyton Place.
    Or so I concluded at the time (I make no claim that my conclusion was >correct). What a decline!

    There are, IOW, reasons for disliking Wagner that have /nothing/ to do
    with anti-Semitism.

    "Wagner's music is better than it sounds."
    --
    columbiaclosings.com
    What's not in Columbia anymore..

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From j.halpenny@rogers.com@21:1/5 to Gary McGath on Mon Apr 10 09:00:18 2023
    On Monday, April 10, 2023 at 6:25:22 AM UTC-4, Gary McGath wrote:
    On 4/9/23 11:14 PM, David Johnston wrote:
    On 2023-04-09 1:46 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:

    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with >>> the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator? >>
    Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
    the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
    fade away before a term is invented.


    The ghost of Fatty Arbuckle would like to have a word with you about how it's a "fad". The ghost of Rock Hudson would too, except it seems to be trapped in a closet. And neither of them were complicit in rape.

    Whether an artist's peccadilloes actually damage their art depends on
    both what the peccadilloes are and the nature of the art. For example Lovecraft's "peccadilloes" don't spoil people's enjoyment of his art
    that much because because they come as no surprise. Lovecraft's brand
    is neurotic xenophobia and so learning that manifested in the form of racism isn't that offputting.
    Many Jews avoid Wagner because of his antisemitism, mostly focusing on
    his essay "Judentum in der Musik." It was nasty but not really unusual
    for Germans of the period; he put into writing what most Germans didn't express in as public and permanent a form. It didn't help his historical reputation that the Nazis adopted him so enthusiastically.

    The conductor Herbert von Karajan, who actually joined the Nazis, hasn't suffered much long-term harm to his reputation.

    Should Wagner's writings affect people's responses to his operas? Most people don't think so, but some are adamant about it. I discussed the question in my "Wagner and Nazism":

    https://oll.libertyfund.org/reading_room/2023-03-02-mcgath-wagner-and-nazism


    How many of you, while in the middle of reading a book or sitting in an opera house, stop and think "What do I know about this guy's politics or sex life"? I think it rarely happened in the old days, but now we read or listen on a computer, and it is
    far too easy to hit pause and go down a rabbit hole that does not involve the work in question, but does get into "what all the cool people are talking about".

    I myself find it almost impossible to view a book or movie on a computer rather than in its original form, so I do go to a movie theatre or to see a live play. When there, I do focus on the work and not on the author's backstory.

    John

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to All on Mon Apr 10 09:07:00 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Mon, 10 Apr 2023 06:25:19 -0400, Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/9/23 11:14 PM, David Johnston wrote:
    On 2023-04-09 1:46 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 02:14:44 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:

    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator? >>>
    Not that I know of. And maybe the whole fad of denigrating
    the work of artists on account of personal peccadilloes will
    fade away before a term is invented.


    The ghost of Fatty Arbuckle would like to have a word with you about how
    it's a "fad". The ghost of Rock Hudson would too, except it seems to be
    trapped in a closet. And neither of them were complicit in rape.

    Whether an artist's peccadilloes actually damage their art depends on
    both what the peccadilloes are and the nature of the art. For example
    Lovecraft's "peccadilloes" don't spoil people's enjoyment of his art
    that much because because they come as no surprise. Lovecraft's brand
    is neurotic xenophobia and so learning that manifested in the form of
    racism isn't that offputting.


    Many Jews avoid Wagner because of his antisemitism, mostly focusing on
    his essay "Judentum in der Musik." It was nasty but not really unusual
    for Germans of the period; he put into writing what most Germans didn't >express in as public and permanent a form. It didn't help his historical >reputation that the Nazis adopted him so enthusiastically.

    The conductor Herbert von Karajan, who actually joined the Nazis, hasn't >suffered much long-term harm to his reputation.

    Should Wagner's writings affect people's responses to his operas? Most >people don't think so, but some are adamant about it. I discussed the >question in my "Wagner and Nazism":

    https://oll.libertyfund.org/reading_room/2023-03-02-mcgath-wagner-and-nazism

    One thing I'll say for Wagner -- his Ring series inspired one heck of
    good bit by Anna Russell. But then, so did Verdi's operas based on Shakespeare's plays.

    I did hear the Ring once. This was four-LP set which turned out to be
    mono because it was recorded from 78RPM records (you could here it
    when the switched the original disks). The summary ended all
    enthusiasm: it starts with mythology -- and ends up with Peyton Place.
    Or so I concluded at the time (I make no claim that my conclusion was
    correct). What a decline!

    There are, IOW, reasons for disliking Wagner that have /nothing/ to do
    with anti-Semitism.
    --
    "In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
    development was the disintegration, under Christian
    influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
    of family right."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joel Polowin@21:1/5 to Charles Packer on Mon Apr 10 15:57:13 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On 2023-04-10 3:51 AM, Charles Packer wrote:
    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 15:10:43 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:
    I think that it isn't remotely plausible to call it a "fad". People
    have been critical of works of art because of the artists' behaviour for
    a *long* time. I'm not even convinced that it's much more common now
    than in the past.
    I've been a reader of reviews in newspapers for 50 years --
    of literature, art and music, and I'll say again that it's a
    fad. Or you could call it "critical reassessment" or you could
    call it self-flagellation by the chattering classes. Whatever.
    But it's most certainly a thing in the past decade.

    A thing in the past decade, yes. More so now than in previous decades,
    I profoundly doubt. And "fad" implies a passing trend, and I don't
    think that's the case either.

    Joel

    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
    www.avg.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gary McGath@21:1/5 to Joel Polowin on Mon Apr 10 17:46:43 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On 4/10/23 3:57 PM, Joel Polowin wrote:
    On 2023-04-10 3:51 AM, Charles Packer wrote:
    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 15:10:43 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:
    I think that it isn't remotely plausible to call it a "fad".  People
    have been critical of works of art because of the artists' behaviour for >>> a *long* time.  I'm not even convinced that it's much more common now
    than in the past.
    I've been a reader of reviews in newspapers for 50 years --
    of literature, art and music, and I'll say again that it's a
    fad. Or you could call it "critical reassessment" or you could
    call it self-flagellation by the chattering classes. Whatever.
    But it's most certainly a thing in the past decade.

    A thing in the past decade, yes.  More so now than in previous decades,
    I profoundly doubt.  And "fad" implies a passing trend, and I don't
    think that's the case either.

    It's become a lot more visible because of the Internet. Before that,
    people who hated an author or artist needed to go out on a sidewalk and
    hold signs. If they were very lucky, they got into the local TV news.

    --
    Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gary McGath@21:1/5 to Paul S Person on Mon Apr 10 17:44:55 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On 4/10/23 12:07 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

    One thing I'll say for Wagner -- his Ring series inspired one heck of
    good bit by Anna Russell. But then, so did Verdi's operas based on Shakespeare's plays.

    I did hear the Ring once. This was four-LP set which turned out to be
    mono because it was recorded from 78RPM records (you could here it
    when the switched the original disks). The summary ended all
    enthusiasm: it starts with mythology -- and ends up with Peyton Place.
    Or so I concluded at the time (I make no claim that my conclusion was correct). What a decline!

    There are, IOW, reasons for disliking Wagner that have /nothing/ to do
    with anti-Semitism.

    Someone once said, "Wagner has some great moments, and some boring
    quarter hours."

    I wonder how many 78s the Ring took and how many bookcases they required.

    --
    Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scott Dorsey@21:1/5 to garym@mcgath.com on Mon Apr 10 22:21:51 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:

    I wonder how many 78s the Ring took and how many bookcases they required.

    The first full recording of the whole Ring was by Moralt in Vienna in 1948,
    and it was incredibly artificial sounding. Tiny orchestra in a tiny studio, but they managed to do the whole thing even if it was a bit rushed.

    I have the Siegfried from that set and it's on 38 12" shellac disks. So
    if the other three operas are about the same length, you'd expect 152 disks
    for the whole set.

    Note that they actually cut a lot of stuff out to make it fit onto records,
    so to say it's a "full recording" is not QUITE accurate, but it's more complete than one might like.
    --scott

    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ted Nolan @21:1/5 to garym@mcgath.com on Mon Apr 10 22:27:04 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    In article <u1200n$2aupq$1@dont-email.me>,
    Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
    On 4/10/23 12:07 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

    One thing I'll say for Wagner -- his Ring series inspired one heck of
    good bit by Anna Russell. But then, so did Verdi's operas based on
    Shakespeare's plays.

    I did hear the Ring once. This was four-LP set which turned out to be
    mono because it was recorded from 78RPM records (you could here it
    when the switched the original disks). The summary ended all
    enthusiasm: it starts with mythology -- and ends up with Peyton Place.
    Or so I concluded at the time (I make no claim that my conclusion was
    correct). What a decline!

    There are, IOW, reasons for disliking Wagner that have /nothing/ to do
    with anti-Semitism.

    Someone once said, "Wagner has some great moments, and some boring
    quarter hours."

    I wonder how many 78s the Ring took and how many bookcases they required.


    I don't quite understand the wp entry, but it suggests that 12" 78s could
    get at least 4.5 minutes per side. That seems low to me given that 10" 78s could do a 3 minute pop song per side.

    Anyway, it would be a lot.
    --
    columbiaclosings.com
    What's not in Columbia anymore..

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scott Dorsey@21:1/5 to All on Mon Apr 10 23:05:59 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:

    I don't quite understand the wp entry, but it suggests that 12" 78s could
    get at least 4.5 minutes per side. That seems low to me given that 10" 78s >could do a 3 minute pop song per side.

    It depends on the groove pitch.... use a coarser pitch and you can make the record louder but you don't get as many minutes on it.

    The record turns at constant rpm instead of constant linear velocity, so
    the running time is linear with diameter and not with area. (With LPs you
    run into the additional problem that the linear velocity on the inner tracks
    is too low to carry much high frequency information and this is a worry with 78s but not as severe.) So a 12" record only has a bit more time than a 10". --scott

    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Keith F. Lynch@21:1/5 to Scott Dorsey on Mon Apr 10 23:28:03 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
    Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
    I don't quite understand the wp entry, but it suggests that 12" 78s
    could get at least 4.5 minutes per side. That seems low to me
    given that 10" 78s could do a 3 minute pop song per side.

    It depends on the groove pitch.... use a coarser pitch and you can
    make the record louder but you don't get as many minutes on it.

    That's true of 33s (and 45s, and 16s), but I don't think it's true of
    78s, since on 78s the encoding in grooves was vertical, not horizontal.
    --
    Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
    Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ted Nolan @21:1/5 to Keith F. Lynch on Tue Apr 11 03:10:35 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    In article <u12622$in8$1@reader2.panix.com>,
    Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
    Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
    Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
    I don't quite understand the wp entry, but it suggests that 12" 78s
    could get at least 4.5 minutes per side. That seems low to me
    given that 10" 78s could do a 3 minute pop song per side.

    It depends on the groove pitch.... use a coarser pitch and you can
    make the record louder but you don't get as many minutes on it.

    That's true of 33s (and 45s, and 16s), but I don't think it's true of
    78s, since on 78s the encoding in grooves was vertical, not horizontal.

    I thought that was just the "Edison" 78s? (Which wouldn't play on Victrolas). --
    columbiaclosings.com
    What's not in Columbia anymore..

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Charles Packer@21:1/5 to Joel Polowin on Tue Apr 11 07:03:17 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Mon, 10 Apr 2023 15:57:13 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:

    On 2023-04-10 3:51 AM, Charles Packer wrote:
    On Sun, 09 Apr 2023 15:10:43 -0400, Joel Polowin wrote:
    I think that it isn't remotely plausible to call it a "fad". People
    have been critical of works of art because of the artists' behaviour
    for a *long* time. I'm not even convinced that it's much more common
    now than in the past.
    I've been a reader of reviews in newspapers for 50 years -- of
    literature, art and music, and I'll say again that it's a fad. Or you
    could call it "critical reassessment" or you could call it
    self-flagellation by the chattering classes. Whatever.
    But it's most certainly a thing in the past decade.

    A thing in the past decade, yes. More so now than in previous decades,
    I profoundly doubt. And "fad" implies a passing trend, and I don't
    think that's the case either.

    Joel

    Yes, fad wasn't the right word. How about "ongoing project" to cast
    doubt on some artists? That would make me a conspiracy theorist, though.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Peter Trei@21:1/5 to Keith F. Lynch on Tue Apr 11 06:48:06 2023
    On Monday, April 10, 2023 at 7:28:05 PM UTC-4, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
    Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
    Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
    I don't quite understand the wp entry, but it suggests that 12" 78s
    could get at least 4.5 minutes per side. That seems low to me
    given that 10" 78s could do a 3 minute pop song per side.

    It depends on the groove pitch.... use a coarser pitch and you can
    make the record louder but you don't get as many minutes on it.
    That's true of 33s (and 45s, and 16s), but I don't think it's true of
    78s, since on 78s the encoding in grooves was vertical, not horizontal.

    Both formats were used for 78s, the early Pathe and Edison disks used
    vertical.

    http://www.vjm.biz/styli-for-playing-78s.html

    pt

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scott Dorsey@21:1/5 to All on Tue Apr 11 15:28:20 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
    In article <u12622$in8$1@reader2.panix.com>,
    Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
    Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
    Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
    I don't quite understand the wp entry, but it suggests that 12" 78s
    could get at least 4.5 minutes per side. That seems low to me
    given that 10" 78s could do a 3 minute pop song per side.

    It depends on the groove pitch.... use a coarser pitch and you can
    make the record louder but you don't get as many minutes on it.

    That's true of 33s (and 45s, and 16s), but I don't think it's true of
    78s, since on 78s the encoding in grooves was vertical, not horizontal.

    I thought that was just the "Edison" 78s? (Which wouldn't play on Victrolas).

    Edison and some Pathe records. But yes, almost all 78s were lateral cut.

    Edison was very big on the vertical modulation thing and the cylinder thing because the tracking was very consistent and the linear velocity was constant. --scott
    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BCFD36@21:1/5 to Joel Polowin on Wed Apr 12 18:18:21 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On 4/8/23 23:14, Joel Polowin wrote:
    I'm familiar with the work of the "suck fairy", who notionally visits artistic works one enjoyed many years earlier and adds "suckiness" so
    that they later seem dire.  Sometimes it's the result of a changing
    personal viewpoint -- with more maturity and breadth of experience, one
    can see flaws to which one was blind.  Sometimes it comes from changes
    in social mores and customs; attitudes towards minorities, women, etc.
    become very dated, and even a work which was progressive for its time
    can later seem painful.

    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
     Sometimes it's later discovered that the creator had some pretty awful behaviour in secret (Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Cosby).  Sometimes an artist changes over time and becomes an awful person (Orson Scott Card,
    Scott Adams), which usually results in later works becoming problematic
    even if the earlier ones are otherwise generally okay.

    Joel


    A year or so ago I reread the Foundation Trilogy. It didn't exactly
    suck, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I did as a teen. Now I am afraid
    to reread Dune because it might suffer the same fate. I tried to reread
    Thomas Covenant many years ago and it sucked. I am afraid to reread Dune
    as it might suck too.

    --
    Dave Scruggs
    Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
    Sr. Software Engineer (Retired, mostly)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul S Person@21:1/5 to bcfd36@cruzio.com on Thu Apr 13 09:44:01 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 18:18:21 -0700, BCFD36 <bcfd36@cruzio.com> wrote:

    On 4/8/23 23:14, Joel Polowin wrote:
    I'm familiar with the work of the "suck fairy", who notionally visits
    artistic works one enjoyed many years earlier and adds "suckiness" so
    that they later seem dire. Sometimes it's the result of a changing
    personal viewpoint -- with more maturity and breadth of experience, one
    can see flaws to which one was blind. Sometimes it comes from changes
    in social mores and customs; attitudes towards minorities, women, etc.
    become very dated, and even a work which was progressive for its time
    can later seem painful.

    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
    Sometimes it's later discovered that the creator had some pretty awful
    behaviour in secret (Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Cosby). Sometimes an
    artist changes over time and becomes an awful person (Orson Scott Card,
    Scott Adams), which usually results in later works becoming problematic
    even if the earlier ones are otherwise generally okay.

    Joel


    A year or so ago I reread the Foundation Trilogy. It didn't exactly
    suck, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I did as a teen. Now I am afraid
    to reread Dune because it might suffer the same fate. I tried to reread >Thomas Covenant many years ago and it sucked. I am afraid to reread Dune
    as it might suck too.

    Foundation has been good every time I read it. So has Dune.

    Thomas Covenant, for me, sucked the first time.

    To each his own!
    --
    "In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
    development was the disintegration, under Christian
    influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
    of family right."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tim Merrigan@21:1/5 to bcfd36@cruzio.com on Thu Apr 13 16:43:14 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 18:18:21 -0700, BCFD36 <bcfd36@cruzio.com> wrote:

    On 4/8/23 23:14, Joel Polowin wrote:
    I'm familiar with the work of the "suck fairy", who notionally visits
    artistic works one enjoyed many years earlier and adds "suckiness" so
    that they later seem dire. Sometimes it's the result of a changing
    personal viewpoint -- with more maturity and breadth of experience, one
    can see flaws to which one was blind. Sometimes it comes from changes
    in social mores and customs; attitudes towards minorities, women, etc.
    become very dated, and even a work which was progressive for its time
    can later seem painful.

    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator?
    Sometimes it's later discovered that the creator had some pretty awful
    behaviour in secret (Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Cosby). Sometimes an
    artist changes over time and becomes an awful person (Orson Scott Card,
    Scott Adams), which usually results in later works becoming problematic
    even if the earlier ones are otherwise generally okay.

    Joel


    A year or so ago I reread the Foundation Trilogy. It didn't exactly
    suck, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I did as a teen. Now I am afraid
    to reread Dune because it might suffer the same fate. I tried to reread >Thomas Covenant many years ago and it sucked. I am afraid to reread Dune
    as it might suck too.

    How is it Thomas Convenient didn't suck the first time you read it? As
    it did for me.

    --

    Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

    Tim Merrigan

    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
    www.avg.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Kevrob@21:1/5 to Tim Merrigan on Sat Apr 15 05:55:57 2023
    On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 7:43:16 PM UTC-4, Tim Merrigan wrote:
    On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 18:18:21 -0700, BCFD36 <bcf...@cruzio.com> wrote:
    On 4/8/23 23:14, Joel Polowin wrote:
    I'm familiar with the work of the "suck fairy", who notionally visits
    artistic works one enjoyed many years earlier and adds "suckiness" so
    that they later seem dire. Sometimes it's the result of a changing
    personal viewpoint -- with more maturity and breadth of experience, one >> can see flaws to which one was blind. Sometimes it comes from changes
    in social mores and customs; attitudes towards minorities, women, etc.
    become very dated, and even a work which was progressive for its time
    can later seem painful.

    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator? >> Sometimes it's later discovered that the creator had some pretty awful >> behaviour in secret (Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Cosby). Sometimes an
    artist changes over time and becomes an awful person (Orson Scott Card, >> Scott Adams), which usually results in later works becoming problematic >> even if the earlier ones are otherwise generally okay.

    Joel


    A year or so ago I reread the Foundation Trilogy. It didn't exactly
    suck, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I did as a teen. Now I am afraid
    to reread Dune because it might suffer the same fate. I tried to reread >Thomas Covenant many years ago and it sucked. I am afraid to reread Dune >as it might suck too.
    How is it Thomas Convenient didn't suck the first time you read it? As
    it did for me.

    --

    I was in a very extended bad mood when I read the first of those.
    I was oddly sympathetic to TC's "everything sucks" attitude, though
    not to the point of suicidal thoughts. I bought the paperback of
    _Lord Foul's Bane_ on a road trip to a fantasy land, Florida, where
    my parents were to retire. After about half a year, including a stint
    working at a factory where we made orange juice dispensers for
    restaurants, I headed back North in time for X-Con 2 in Milwaukee.

    I visited zero theme parks while down there.

    I read the first trilogy, but no more than that.

    --
    Kevin R
    a.a #2310

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BCFD36@21:1/5 to Tim Merrigan on Sat Apr 15 11:44:25 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On 4/13/23 16:43, Tim Merrigan wrote:
    On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 18:18:21 -0700, BCFD36 <bcfd36@cruzio.com> wrote:

    On 4/8/23 23:14, Joel Polowin wrote:
    I'm familiar with the work of the "suck fairy", who notionally visits
    artistic works one enjoyed many years earlier and adds "suckiness" so
    that they later seem dire.  Sometimes it's the result of a changing
    personal viewpoint -- with more maturity and breadth of experience, one
    can see flaws to which one was blind.  Sometimes it comes from changes
    in social mores and customs; attitudes towards minorities, women, etc.
    become very dated, and even a work which was progressive for its time
    can later seem painful.

    Is there a different term to describe when there's nothing wrong with
    the work itself, but it becomes tainted by association with its creator? >>>  Sometimes it's later discovered that the creator had some pretty awful >>> behaviour in secret (Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Cosby).  Sometimes an
    artist changes over time and becomes an awful person (Orson Scott Card,
    Scott Adams), which usually results in later works becoming problematic
    even if the earlier ones are otherwise generally okay.

    Joel


    A year or so ago I reread the Foundation Trilogy. It didn't exactly
    suck, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I did as a teen. Now I am afraid
    to reread Dune because it might suffer the same fate. I tried to reread
    Thomas Covenant many years ago and it sucked. I am afraid to reread Dune
    as it might suck too.

    How is it Thomas Convenient didn't suck the first time you read it? As
    it did for me.

    Not a clue. I read them all in quick succession in my very early 20s or
    so. Maybe even earlier. I tried again years later and, well, no. Just no.
    --
    Dave Scruggs
    Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
    Sr. Software Engineer (Retired, mostly)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Dallman@21:1/5 to Tim Merrigan on Sat Apr 15 21:28:00 2023
    In article <8q4h3il11top98gnkmq52lnfkbikpnnif6@4ax.com>, tppm@ca.rr.com
    (Tim Merrigan) wrote:

    How is it Thomas Convenient didn't suck the first time you read it?
    As it did for me.

    Various college friends were raving over it when I was a freshman. I
    started Lord Foul's Bane and gave up maybe 70-80 pages in because it
    sucked big-time. That year taught me a lot about reading.

    --
    John Dallman
    "This isn't a supernova problem. It's a pointy-haired boss problem."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Dormer@21:1/5 to Dallman on Sun Apr 16 16:27:00 2023
    In article <memo.20230415212851.3216C@jgd.cix.co.uk>, jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) wrote:


    Various college friends were raving over it when I was a freshman. I
    started Lord Foul's Bane and gave up maybe 70-80 pages in because it
    sucked big-time. That year taught me a lot about reading.

    I presume John that you remember the Clench Racing that Nick Lowe used to
    do at conventions. Throw copies of the books into the audience, get
    people to start reading at random, and the first person to find the word "clench" wins. Didn't use to take long.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joel Polowin@21:1/5 to Tim Merrigan on Sun Apr 16 12:19:19 2023
    XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

    On 2023-04-13 7:43 PM, Tim Merrigan wrote:
    How is it Thomas Convenient didn't suck the first time you read it? As
    it did for me.

    I found the main character somewhat annoying, but plausible given his circumstances. I liked the other protagonist characters and the
    setting. In my late teens at the time, I wasn't yet put off by the
    EEEEEVIL antagonist. I did find some of the names to be ridiculous:
    "Drool Rockworm", good grief.

    I *was* quite annoyed to learn, a few years later, that leprosy could
    in fact be treated. If the novels were set in an earlier period, that
    wasn't clear to me.

    Joel

    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
    www.avg.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Dallman@21:1/5 to Paul Dormer on Sun Apr 16 17:33:00 2023
    In article <memo.20230416162739.6296C@pauldormer.cix.co.uk>, prd@pauldormer.cix.co.uk (Paul Dormer) wrote:

    I presume John that you remember the Clench Racing that Nick Lowe
    used to do at conventions. Throw copies of the books into the
    audience, get people to start reading at random, and the first
    person to find the word "clench" wins. Didn't use to take long.

    I do indeed. He, and Joseph Nicholas' reviews in _Paperback Inferno_ were significant in my developing taste in books.

    --
    John Dallman
    "This isn't a supernova problem. It's a pointy-haired boss problem."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)