Posted by Rick Denney on November 07, 2003 at 13:29:43:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: simple answers posted by Read the I was on November 07, 2003 at 02:12:22:
Tony, you're right, Joe can take care of himself, and has done so pretty well without my help. But I'm not defending Joe; I'm defending something else.
An implicit assumption in the reactions to Joe's post seems to me this: Everyone assumes that Joe is a non-auditionee who thinks he has the breath control that he complains other auditionees lack. Thus, he is setting himself up to be superior without being willing to test that superiority as they do. I can't find anywhere in anything he said where he claims to have the breath control others lack, or that he hasn't endured those tests. Most of the complaints about what he says seem to be based on something other than what I read.
Now, why would I read it any differently than someone else? Could it be that I'm Joe's friend who knows him to be honest and humble in person and who therefore looks for the positive aspects of what he says? Perhaps. But why shouldn't a blank stranger apply the same benefit of the doubt, and look past provocation for the deeper value in what was suggested? After all, Joe said he was being provocative right in his post, right from the start, and I never saw the same sort of ad hominem personal attacks that were returned to him.
Thus, I'm not defending Joe, I'm defending the importance of content over style, and the importance of underlying principles over expression. Yes, that is a reflection of me. In many ways it's something I do for a living.
Rick "wondering how many tuba players of all levels are honestly evaluating their breath control this week because of Joe's provocativeness" Denney