Re: [TANGO-L] True tango and nuevo tango

[Kos.Zahariev @EC.GC.CA]

Aron writes:

 >For Konstantin:
 >
 >Well, first of all thank you for implying that what I said was crap.


Aron, my only implicit critique towards you was about your approach to tango
definitions. Yes, your definition, IF it were to gain popular acceptance,
might eventually result in some utter crap being called tango, just as it
happened in art where an analogous approach to definitions was almost
universally accepted. Notice that the word 'crap' denotes something in the
aftermath of applying such a post-modern approach to definitions, not the act
of stating what that approach might be.


 >Second, thank you that you consider me equal to a person who is only an
 >artist because he says so.


In my art analogy, the self-proclaimed artist I referred to is merely a user
of the thus-accepted approach to definitions and there is no reason why s/he
should be conflated or mistaken with that other person (that would be the
analogous person to you) who advocated or helped establish the said
approach to definitions.


 >I don't think that I deserved that, or I that you had slightest of
 >reasons (or right) to say that.


Perhaps this and the previous sentence is a strawman argument since you
attribute to me something I did not communicate and then proceed to demolish
it to prove that I was wrong in communicating it. You are quite right that,
HAD I communicated this, you would not have deserved it. And I haven't. I do
not know you at all and I barely know just a very small facet of your ideas
about a very specific subject. Surely I can't make any informed comment about
your person.



 >Third, I am no art critic. What I was saying was based on mere logic.
 >The logic of a person who understands emotional arguments but does not
 >consider them objective.
 >Your view (and some other pro-authentic guys' on the list) are
 >subjective. Your own view.


Again, perhaps you could re-read my words regarding your approach to tango
definitions. You could notice that they are general and independent of new
tango or supporting the substance of true tango. You would also see that
this was only one out of 5 paragraphs, and that I lastly urged people to
concentrate on the substance of the charges by Bartek (in order to have a
constructive discussion). Also, perhaps you have not seen that my other email
in this discussion.

I do not know enough about new tango to have an informed opinion on the
balance of its strengths and weaknesses. You could see that I talked only in
very general terms about it, and the more categorical comments or statements
were related to tango music where I feel that I have much more knowledge. So,
to put it coarsely, I am 'pro-authentic' in regards to tango argentino music
especially since in my view the dance follows and depends on the music and is
not an independent entity. I am neutral in regards to new tango dance but that
does not preclude me from making general comments that apply to the way we can
frame the discussion or the approach to definitions.


 >Maybe you find a 100 others to support it,
 >but it does not authorize you to talk in absolutes.


I am sorry, I do not know what this means. See above.

I will try to reply to other parts of your post and to other comments in a
separate email.

Best regards,
           Konstantin