Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Posts 51 to 54 of 54
  1. #51

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    Boundaries are good. Without boundaries no music could be classified as baroque or Japanese folk or reggae. And all music or art would be equally good or bad no matter how it's created. Implicit human aesthetic appreciation constraints are one set of boundaries that make art possible. Commonly observed and adhered to constraints of sub styles of an art form that define that style and inspire artists in that period are another.
    Without boundaries there wouldn't be art. Parameters of boundaries can change however.
    There are some fairly big assumptions in the post. It would be interesting to examine them in depth.

    Cultural norms used to dictate the aesthetics of music. In the western world this was obviously the classical canon and the skills required to play that music (contemporary composers regarded with amused suspicion of course.)

    Is this changing with the advent of multiculturalism and mass recording? It would seem so. Jazz was obviously the first music to seriously challenge this hierarchy.

    Genres are perhaps one way of keeping musical style separate in this eclectic world. People (blokes in pubs and Internet forums mostly) obviously get super nerdy about this.

    But I have observed this - youth subculture attached to this or that style of music seem to have largely vanished. Kids are very eclectic now.

    Anyway, I might dig into the literature on this. Big changes going on.

    (There have been moves towards dethroning classical music from its central position in music pedagogy. That said, current UK music education policy, such as it is, is centred around the orchestra however (apparently string quartets even are bit hippy) and lest we see this as another front in the ever tedious culture wars, it might be worth pointing out the same was true in Chavez’s Venezuela.

    In fact increasingly in India and China classical music is associated with prestige and is fast becoming the international lingua Franca even as it is becoming increasingly only one of many options available in western conservatoires.

    Obviously it was us lot the jazzers that started that off....)

    Anyway, I think music is moving towards an ever more eclectic approach. I think it’s great. I really hear it in today’s jazz. Tigran Hamasyan is a case in point, for instance....


    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
  3. #52
    Good points. But just to be clear, I wasn't advocating for some sort of musical tribalism. It was a more abstract statement about art in general. But I see how saying "boundaries are good" could also be understood that way.

    Maybe that's obvious but although boundaries change overtime, they always exist. There is a hierarchy of boundaries. From stylistic and contemporary conventions to primal, evolutionary aesthetic sense that exists across cultures. These implicit constraints is what I mean by boundaries. These boundaries make art possible, otherwise for example any random sequence of notes would be just as appealing (or unappealing) as any other random music.

    When music gets mixed across cultures, there are still boundaries. A western musician influenced by Indian music will still need to operate within certain boundaries defined by these styles. In fact it's not a strict expansion of boundaries, as you loosen up the boundary in one place, you might add restrictions in others (say to limit certain cliche western conventions to let the Indian influences come across clearly etc). I'm a big fan of this type of stuff.

  4. #53
    This is a rather academic point but I think finding fresh, elevated material within the well beaten path is a greater creative challenge than the ability find ways the change the boundaries in a way that gets accepted by others. The latter often requires help from other factors. Charismatic appeal or catching the attention of a small but influential group. Sometimes just one rich art enthusiast or the curator of major art gallery etc.

  5. #54
    A lot of these discussions have been regarding "real rubato " versus amateurs just using that label to justify lack of ability. Rubato is "out of time" only in the sense that you're using "In Time" as your starting reference . It's the thing you measure it against. I'd imagine it's the same thing with most art.

    Abstract artists are abstracting SOMETHING . It's not just the absence of any boundary whatsoever. There's a huge difference between a master playing rubato really well versus an amateur who can't play in time and just calls it that.

    You can't abstract nothing. You can't push boundaries hurt they Don't exist.