XPost: rec.music.bluenote, rec.music.makers.guitar.jazz   
   From: jcmartin@sonic.net   
      
   j_nscott@msn.com wrote:   
      
   > Hi JC,   
   >   
   > Dictionary.com includes "Something that... pleases..." as part of the   
   > definition of entertainment, and "the production of the beautiful" as   
   > part of the definition of art. Is there a difference? Imo no.   
   >   
   > Traditionally, many people in the upper classes have viewed the   
   > subjective aesthetic interests of the upper classes as somehow   
   > implicitly better than the subjective aesthetic interests of the lower   
   > classes, and that's how the nonsensical idea that "art" is implicitly   
   > better than and and in a different class from "entertainment" has been   
   > maintained over the centuries, by snobs.   
      
      
   That's beside the point.  If anything, music like Kenny G. and various   
   forms of smooth are created for the upper class elite.  But back to what   
   our newsgroup troll tossed out.  You'll need to look up the word *art*   
   and then tell me where it's said that "all art is entertainment",   
   because that's what I was commenting on.  Long before the idea that art   
   could be sold on the free market, an impulse in human beings existed to   
   create something which could communicate ideas and emotions not covered   
   by words alone.  The idea that *all* art is entertainment is ludicrous.   
      
   -JC   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)