Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What is music?


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Rick Denney on February 20, 2002 at 11:00:14:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: What is music? posted by Doug on February 19, 2002 at 22:55:24:

Discussions about what is art have been around for as long as art has been considered useful beyond its utility. But how do you define it without falling into subjective issues of taste?

C.S. Lewis attempted to do this. As a professor of English Literature (at Cambridge when he wrote this book), he was distressed to see that book critics frequently judged books based on their own taste. This bothered him, of course, because their taste (or, more accurately, artistic agenda) was driven by their world view (or, more accurately, political agenda), and he disagreed with it. So, he wrote the book "An Exeriment in Criticism" in the late 1950's to grapple with a means of criticism that would not be biased by the artistic agenda of the critic.

He made a strong case for judging art on the basis of the reaction it evoked in people. He made a distinction between the non-artistic reaction (e.g., "His eyes follow you around the room," of a portrait painting) and an artistic reaction ("I can't take my eyes off this haunting expression..."). He felt that a line could be drawn between literature and non-literature on the basis of this reaction. For example, ANY book that attracted a devoted following, such that the followers reread the book lovingly over a long period, deserved to be in the literature camp, no matter how the literary intelligentsia felt about it at the time. And he felt that anyone who could read a book that way was, in fact, literary. So, he defined literature as books that made readers literary.

Carrying that over to music, we could define music as any sounds that make listeners feel musical. For example, a Bach chorale, which is sung in a language unknown to many of us, must succeed as music if it is to succeed at all. Many people respond to it in utterly musical ways, listening to it over many years, treasuring their best recordings of it, and pulling it out in times when they feel a special need for music. It defines itself as music by how listeners react to it.

I believe that some rap falls into this category, because doubtless some people respond in a musical way to it. Other rap, on the other hand, evokes only a political response, in that same way that a non-literary, but passionate work of history might inflame a political response in the reader. It succeeds as poetry or as a political statement (with some listeners) but fails as music. The response of even its most ardent supporters is not a musical response. The key test for rap, but this approach, is if it seems as musical when delivered in a language foreign to the listener. I wonder who would listen to some of the rap songs I've endured if the message was rendered unintelligible.

Here's another example: The rock group Yes wrote many songs that were extremely popular in their day. Many people wondered what the words meant, but really they didn't mean anything. The group chose the words following some musical inner voice. It seems quite as musical to me whether or not I understand what the words mean.

This brings me finally to John Cage. In his work 4:31, he delivers (?) the ultimate in minimalist music: silence. For someone rebelling against musical tradition (for whatever reason), the statement made by this work would appeal to them. This rebellion is a key component of the modernists I know. Outside that statement, however, it utterly fails as music, because it does not evoke any sort of a musical response.

I've listened to everything from gregorian chant to Philip Glass, and some of the most abstract works have evoked a musical response in me or in others I know. Therefore, I think this approach works pretty well in drawing the line between what is music and what isn't, as long as we have open minds about the responses of people other than just ourselves.

Rick "recalling that C.S. Lewis didn't just write religious books" Denney


Follow Ups: