Why would you assume this? You mean we
can't have a focused discussion on a particular topic that happens to be
technical or mechanical related, without you jumping to the conclusion that we
are holding that particular topic as more important than art? That's sort of
restrictive and a way of censoring our freedom of thought, wouldn't
you say?
Bottom line: Having the conversation
doesn't mean that we don't understand or value the artistic elements of the
music. That is a false cause or false association
fallacy. We are just having the damn
conversation. I supposed experts in the marshal arts can't talk about the
mechanics of their art (which are very important, btw), without disregarding
their art? I don't think so. It's just a conversation about a specific
point.
We go about our personal disciplines to
accomplish these choices of expression, then we take it into the artistic
world to make our statements. Fuzz, no fuzz, dark, brite . . . some of my
favorite moments in guitar are ones thet defy technique; how did they do
THAT?! moments, and I've had them myself and relish the experience of
confounding myself in the act of expression.
So YEAH: As a guitar
teacher, YES, I would encourage students to get a little technique and
backbone, but I could give a shit once they hit the stage or recording studio.
DID THEY MOVE ME OR NOT?