Inwood attacked again

[Nick Baty]

Removed

[The original poster has removed his post - Musicus, moderator]

[johnquinn39]

I am personally thinking of ignoring Catholic blogs altogether. They seem so often (not always, of course!) to be full of extremely unhappy people who are very attatched to good music and ceremony, but perhaps have never really 'got into' the beauty of the post-V2 Eucharist.
What I aim for as a parish music assistant, is to find music that expresses the Word of God, and helps people to pray. I think that this is successful when two or more people come up to me or another choir person and say that they liked the music, and could relate to the words.
People rarely ask for the composer of the music, as this is of no interest to them.
It seems to me that Paul Inwood has made an enormous contribution to the music of the post V2 liturgy.
If Damian has written anything better, I' m sure we would all be delighted to hear it, and I have no doubt he would be most welcome to present this to the SSG composer's group!

[JW]

It's worth remembering that Liturgy and Music are not actually the main thrust of what the church is there for. Good liturgy assists worship and can help attract people into the Church. However anyone who is principally looking for a spiritual 'fix' will not be happy.

[musicus]

I'm sure I'm not the only person who hates the injustice of some blogs. Damian Thompson's been at it again (that comment alone will lead to him having another go). He obviously has it in for Paul Inwood. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/ukcorrespo ... hoohoo.htm and while we're all entitled to our opinions, I'm becoming increasingly irritated that he's pedaling misinformation (doubtless he'll have a go at me for that).

Hmm. I don't see any overt misinformation as such in Damian's blog post: his reference to Paul Inwood is more in the nature of a gratuitous side-swipe (not his main point), and the song he takes exception to is apparently by Graham Kendrick. Paul Inwood isn't mentioned at all in the ensuing discussion until Nick himself does so, and even then, what follows is but a pale shadow of last year's outburst. I get the feeling that the people there no longer have much appetite for Inwood bashing and have decided to move on.

[presbyter]

........ the people there no longer have much appetite for Inwood bashing and have decided to move on.

To Cardinal "Conman" it appears - how rude!

[sidvicius]

The Lesson for everyone in the Blogosphere:http://site.despair.com/despairwear/yourblog/?sort=bestseller

[organist]

True. I confine my blog to those who have asked to be invited to read it!

[sidvicius]

No offence intended organist. I'm just amazed at the number of people who request I look at their weblog - which is after all, little more than a diary or journal for the IT age. Such things used to be private affairs for personal thoughts, and were often full of stuff which should never see the light of day. I would expect some editors, when presented with the diary of some deceased celeb are embarrassed to let it go to print, despite the obvious financial benefits.

The writer here is of course, a 'journal'-ist, but I think this is one of those occasions where the opinions expressed do not necesarily represent the views of his employer, they are merely aired to generate discussion, an audience, without which, the media is nothing. I'm not sure that he is deliberately out to attack Inwood (any 'name' composer could have been used), or just general standards of Catholic music? And therein lies a larger debate, which will of course go on ad nauseam. This ain't really news, at best it's recycling.