>the FIRST thing the cat came with was talking about a 'pure'
>gospel sound. he made a characterization of what it sounded
>like. to me, characterization = assesment = critque

here's the only mention of purity i saw:

I don’t doubt that these singers actually grew up going to church, or that they might have even sung in church, >>but the fact is that at this point in time the majority of black singers are more influenced by radio/MTV/BET than any kind of >>>“pure”<<< church tradition.<< In other words, they learn to sing “black” the same way their authenticity-seeking white peers do.

that's got nothing to do w/critiquing gospel.

and it's toward the end of the post anyway...it's not the 1st thing he said.

>in my estimation, he is wrong off the bat. which is what
>made me call into question everything else he said. he went
>on to say other things i think are in error (black folks not
>valuing authenticity, for one), which backed up my initial
>skepticism.

i wondered about the authenticity part too.