a new comment on your post

richard has left a new comment on your post "回應":

I am not sure sir you understand my intent so I will say it right here: I am speaking on behalf of myself, and meanwhile not commenting on specifically your case (on issues of artistic excellence and assessing various orders of value by it) I am nonetheless thoroughly intrigue by your rather rash response towards Leechard's post.

Think back awhile ago wishing I could respond to you personally earlier, I can only regret if I could type my opinion here instead:

If you have suggested Alkan to us readers, perhaps you have heard of Sorabji. Meanwhile they all are masters, it is rather unfortunate that very few have heard of them nowadays.

They are similar to Liszt in his age, serious musicians with a progressive (or so they have convicted themselves) outlook to artistic expression.

My point is this: meanwhile the pursuit of perfecting technique is important and moreover indivisible to the overall requirement to achievement, the understanding and epiphany towards the idea itself is equally important. (as have written in Leechard's article regarding the way to master Zhuang Zi's ideals)

Your initial comment towards Leechard that (as to the best of my understanding) anyone can achieve similar emotive (?) and sensational wisdom if they can get themselves into relationships (?), and by its experiences (hopefully not intentional) you too, can achieve that ripening of the soul.

This is precisely what Leechard has commented on: 問題是，技巧是不是真的這樣重要？而你以為「容易」的靈性修為，就真的是這樣容易？從技術這道門，
能夠進入那無限崇高的殿堂？(directly quoted from his article)

Now as far as I can see, I can only sense Leechard's question more like an advise, a suggestion: however your response are much more argumentative:

5.我唔知你所謂的'靈性修為' ,
作為你多年的讀者,我只有勸你寫野'實際'一點;
近日發現了一本書:黑白溢彩-荷洛維茲的藝術
這作者的風格'實際'得多,望你學習

Now I happen to read the book too (happened to picked it up at Toronto where the author resided), and thoroughly enjoyed its contents. My question however is this, let us suppose you have the time (and paid the respective effort, let us assume) of Horowitz himself: does that have anything to do with YOUR personal achievement?

My next question is this: suppose you have achieved the same technical and artistic mastery of Horowitz: Which way is more preferable, Alkan, or Sobraji? I would assume you would know plenty of other musicians whom by the flow of time faded into obscurity. Just wondering about your thoughts, that's all.

Hopefully I can hear from you, but I suppose This is not exactly the place to discuss matters like these, especially hijacked from Leechard's space. My apologies.

Richard Si