virus: Gyoto monks (I really mean this: that's a cool name!)

Reed Konsler (
Fri, 11 Jul 1997 11:41:35 -0400 (EDT)

>Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 11:21:50 +0000
>From: Ken Pantheists <>

>1) Sympathetic "vibrations" sound like sympathetic magic.
>Wow.... you guys really are out on a witch hunt. I just explained it to
>you in technichal terms from the viewpoint of a practitioner. This is
>like me telling you how to jump and your response being "this sounds an
>awful lot like flying to me".

>2) Human beings have quite a wide range of morphology. I find it hard
>believe that Michael Jordon and Dr. Ruth are both efficient receptors
>the same "body harmonics".

>Then you would find it hard to believe that they are both efficient
>receptors for "A minor" played on a piano keyboard. Or that only a few
>people who are exactly like you get that "chest rumble" when standing in
>front of a night club speaker. And please don't jam my words together in
>quotation marks. I never put the words body and harmonics together. You
>are trying to make me look like a fruitcake. The proper term is Vocal

Hey, Steve: Let's play "straw man" OK?

It was you that said, and I quote:

"But to get back to your observation of Mahler. You actually didn't get
the same experience from Mahler. Mahler's music was written to be played
on instruments. And instruments are made of wood, string, metal and reed
and the sounding chambers of most musical instruments are not the same
size or shape as a human body. When the Monks chant, they are actually
setting up sympathetic vibrations inside your own body. The sound of a
violin, although beautiful will, by its nature vibrate a violin more
effectively than your ear."

Are you not insinuating here that the human body is better at "setting up
sympathetic vibrations inside your own body" than a violin?


I'm trying to be very clear here. The Gyoto Monks might send you into
fits of ecstasy...frankly, I don't give a shit. I have enough ecstasy. To
insinuate that Mahler is less effective at this harmonic joy becuase violins
aren't people is just plain ignorant.

IMHO, of course.

If you don't care what I think then why are you getting so upset?

Don't play emotional power games with me. I eat people like you
for lunch. Tit-for-tat. gEt it?

But, maybe you were projecting your anger at Wade onto me?
Did you confuse us for a moment, I mean...we both are from
HARVARD after all, and you know what those pretentious fucks

Got damn capitalist fascists.


It's just words, man. You need to take a chill pill.

> If they are not then you can wave your hands
>and say: "well, results may vary! You just don't have the same body
>cavities as the monks do." I don't doubt the plausibility of such
>statements, but that places "Gyoto monks" outside of intersubjective
>discourse until we find a way to translate the harmonics into everyones
>"body langauge".
>Reed, your really being an annoying jerk ;-)
>That's right... I forgot that Asians have two thoraxic cavities and
>nineteeen lamboidal sutures

What about the above statement leads you to believe that I was making
a racist statement? Oh, I get it. I'm at Harvard. We're racist fucks.
You read the "Bell Curve" didn't you?

Of corse, Gould, author of the definitive de-bunking of "race science"
and here I'm speaking of "The Mismeasure of Man" is also a Harvard

But, of course, he must be repressing.

Eat me. Communication is based on faith. If you don't think I'm
earnest, honest, and trying to reach rapport then stop responding to
my posts.

I'll take care of my personal problems and you work on yours, dig?

You might start with that temper.

>This is a ridiculous arguement to be having over the internet.

It is a poor musician that blames the insturment.

>I *have* translated it into my body (As limited as it is). And let me
>tell you. After five minutes of having High Pitched sound (My students
>say it is like a metal chime) sounding through my skull, I come out with
>a buzz like you wouldn't believe. My vision is a little different too.
>You know how your eyes see yellow in everything after you exert
>yourself, or run?

Dude, like, whatever. If I told you I got off like nobdies business
running flash columns, taking NMRs and publishing research in the
chemical sciences you'd call me a dork and tell me I need to get out

>I am a professional Voice guy. Would you say to a singer that she can't
>hit C above without listening to her?

No, but if she said she hit C by telekinetically vibrating the air without
using her vocal chords I would say that she has a different understanding
of the words and process than I've learned. And I would feel free to point
it out in public, even if it made her feel like a fool. At least she wouldn't
say such again with the impression everyone bought it.

[fake ad]

>You've really toasted me Reed.

That was a joke. Boy, you're awfully self-interested. Where is your
sense of irony? Aren't you an artist? Funny, they say that journalists
don't like to be interviewed because they implictly understand the
mental and emotional violence done to the subject's POV in the
process of cutting the quotes up into what the journalist wants.


You should be honored, I'm Dadaing you. It's a sign of respect.
Do you think we should censor "Piss Christ" or other "offensive"

>There are true realms of knowing outside of science.
>That wasn't the intention of my poast, neither was it my point.

OK. I think it's true though. I'm sorry I misinterpreted you

>My point-- to reiterate. Is that the use of the word mystical or
>non-physical in the description of art-- as in the program notes of a
>concert-- are not bogus. They are a description of "genre" for lack of a
>more easily translated term. It describes the lineage of the art, not
>"where you're supposed to go when you see it". Gawd!!

Ah, I see. Definition of terms...again. Live with the frustration, dude.
Language is a flexible thing, and if mysticism has a negative connotation
in common discourse that is FOR A REASON.

You might disagree, but if all us "deranged" out here don't get the
message then take a deep breath, come off the fucking mountain, get
of the fucking white horse, and teach.

No it isn't easy. Yes, people are belligerent and pigheaded. But most
of us are also well intentioned failures to communicate.

But telling me I'm a fascist, racist, belligent, pigheaded asshole...while
potentially accurate...IS AN INEFFECTIVE METHOD OF


>You sound like we made it up or something. They are Buddhist monks in
>exile.I hope I don't have to describe to you the violence imprisonment
>and massacre these people have fled from. Even if you do think they
>sound "kinda cool" your remark does sound a little disrespectful and
>inappropriate. (But maybe I just have a bug up my ass.)
>I'm just glad I'm not a Tibetan in exhile reading this list.

God, Stephen, take a nap. You're working to hard. In fact, I did think
it was a cool name. I expressed that, and I mean this sincerely, with all
the innocence of a child. It sounded nice to my ear when I said it with
my mouth. That brought me a little it OK that for that moment
I wasn't thinking about massacres and destruction? There are more
aspects than Shiva.

If it sounds disrespectful to you that's becuase you are too fucking full
of yourself and your ability to tell me what I'm thinking. You don't
have a clue...if you did then you'ld listen to me more carefully.

You aren't the moral center of the universe. You might not think so,
but you sure are acting like it.
In short:
"No, Stephen...Fuck Yooooou!"
(allusion: The Breakfast Club)

You wanna go another round, punk?

Or are we going to friends again?

I like playing the angry game sometimes, too. But I find the friends
game so much more rewarding in the long run.

Judo is just dancing with a different premise.



Reed Konsler