"The convenience of having nouns that enables us to name and talk about things inclines us to think of every idea, every relationship, as if it were a thing. We take from the action of loving, for example, or hating, or performing good and evil acts, or telling the truth, or worshiping, or musicking, the abstractions we call love, hate, good and evil, truth, God and music, and if we are not careful we find ourselves coming to treat the abstractions as if they were more real than the actions." I think this is important. Important enough to share. And I applaud the author for having taken a strong stand against a mainstream attitude toward classical music, and how it should be delivered, especially back in 1998. I think he was very daring in pointing out to things like racism, class-ism, and elitism in classical music in its history and industry. Often, I laughed out loud the way people laugh when true things that are difficult to actually verbalize is said by someone else.
However, it became more and more difficult to read toward the middle of the book, and I am giving up on ever finishing the book. The truth is, his assertion - that music is an act and not a concept - is contracted by him having written the book, because he is guilty of the same crime he is accusing the industry/history of. He goes on and on, describing how music should be, without actually presenting any music. He does offer examples, but...
Anyways, it was amusing in the beginning, too much details in the middle (it may be because I just wrote a doctoral thesis on this topic, and so a lot of his claims were familiar to me), and I didn't read the end.