| People have been philosophizing, etc., about music from before the time of Plato
(he who said 'music is far too important to entrust to musicians'!), and in the case
of Hindu mysticism, for example, it is central to the ontology (the relation between
the external and internal sound) and perhaps the difference in this century is that
resources have become available to explore in a concrete way what hitherto could
only be explored as a thought experiment. Joscelyn Godwin, in his book 'Harmonies of
Heaven and Earth' , subtitled, 'from antiquity to the avant-garde' (David S, you'll
love this!) described the music of this century as a 'new Alchemical prima materia',
with which, indeed, we are still cooking. So I think all the activities you list,
and more, are in the musical 'crucible'.
I don't think anyone seriously expects to be able to encapsulate the whole of
'music' in a single sentence. However, the attempt has often led me to new ideas and
insights - and the traffic on this list, on this topic, is surely a sign that this
is true for many of us. It only becomes a problem when people use is as way of
justifying their tastes, or denying other people's tastes. It's not so much the
exercise itself which is worthwhile, but what it leads to...
mbpcpa@sprynet.com wrote:
> Modern music suffers from science envy. Everyone wants their art form to
> logically progress to the "next level", to "advance", to "evolve". This drive
> has led to the chronic conceptualism that bankrupts so much modern art. The
> very feeling that somehow we can encapsule the concept of "music" in a single
> neat phrase is symptomatic of the conceptual disease. But good music has always
> had more in common with love-making, story-telling, prayer, and good cooking
> than it has with philosophising, analogising, systematising, and
> revolutionising.
|