Site Search

Other Resources
News Archive

Search Forums:
This 16 message thread spans 2 pages:  < <   1  [2] 
  Re: Blue Epiphany  dunkinwedd at 09:12 on 16 October 2007

This has turned into a fascinating thread - though it has departed somewhat from the original topic! I can't resist adding a few more pennyworths.

In my opinion, there is no such thing as intrinsically good or bad music. you can't 'prove' a piece good or bad. But it is not entirely subjective either. There is music with less or more content.

Maybe so, Misuc. But who judges whether there is less or more content? Your content and mine are liable to be different, no? So doesn't this also come down to subjectivity?

Is there a non-subjective way to judge music? Is there a meaningful comment we can make about it beyond 'I like it' or 'I don't'?

Music has to be seen as a social act as well as a solitary aesthetic concept.

That is my opinion, too, but it does not chime with Bert Harrisonwistle's. Oddly, though, I'm sure that John Adams would absolutely endorse Misuc's view.

For me, art is a communicative process so there is always a message. I once I asked a sculptor about the message in his work, and he said 'I'm not really interested in narrative art'. Is there a kind of art that is NOT narrative?

What is the 'meaning' of saying the same thing over and over again?

Om mani padme hum, om mani padme hum...

But of more fundamental importance in my mind is the act of creativity, not the acquisition of knowledge. More important is passion, not intellect.

Absolutely: this is why folk and world musics can be so compelling. They make up in passion and authenticity what they lack in sophistication.

If we collectively approached the world with more creativity, and less on myth, superstition, trends, and passive participation, we wouldn't need so much junk. We should eat, play, listen, live and love creatively, and not just learn what the right buttons are to push.


This 16 message thread spans 2 pages:  < <   1  [2]