# Unweaving Some Confusion



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Throughout many of our conversations, I think we have a fundamental problem. It is with statements such as these:

_"I think this piece of music is [insert opinion of quality]."_

People don't usually specify, but these statements can be taken one of two ways, and we are mostly left to guess which one:

1) "I think this piece of music is [insert opinion of quality], _in my opinion/experience_."
2) "I think this piece of music is [insert opinion of quality] _absolutely, no matter whose experience we are talking about_."

Interestingly, most people don't care about these distinctions if the opinion expressed is positive. Personal opinion or generalisation? Who cares, they're being nice! But if someone says something is bad, then people are more likely to take issue with it. And, if someone sees a negative opinion about a piece they like, that person seems more likely to _wrongly_ assume that number 2 is implied when in fact it is number 1 (thus being unnecessarily defensive).

Most of the time, I think it's safe to assume "IMHO/E (experience)" after everything, but in talking to you folks over a long period of time, I know some of you like to moralise and deal in absolutes, so it's not always an assumption that can be accurately made.

For the sake of clarity and sanity, I think we need to restore a little bit of sense and make it beyond doubt in our discussions whether we are talking in terms of subjective values or objective judgements.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

YES!

When I was in high school and learning to write essays, my teacher told us that we shouldn't write things like "in my opinion" or "I believe". Of course it's your opinion because it's your essay. I tend not to include IMO because I think that's obvious. But of course there is a difference between saying "I like Mozart" and "Mozart's piano concertos, as a set, are superior to all others" (both true, of course ). The former can _only_ be my opinion. The latter could be argued using musical ideas. So I could be saying "I like Mozart's piano concertos better than all others" or "Mozart's piano concertos are better because of music idea A, B, C, etc." The second can be argued, but the first cannot.

I basically assume that everyone is posting their own opinion unless they use explicit arguments. Maybe people could just assume statements here are pure opinions rather than arguable statements unless there is reason to believe otherwise.

In other words, the statement "Mozart's music is horrible" means "I hate Mozart's music" not "Mozart's music can be objectively shown to be horrible."


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

IMO the leading "I think" means IMO. This can legitimately lead to the conclusion that I am a friggin' idiot, but it still indicates an opinion.


----------



## Guest (Dec 16, 2011)

I do not think that "the confusion" can be located in whether an opinion is being taken as a statement of opinion or a statement of fact. 

I think it's that for many of us (most?), our opinions ARE facts. (I mostly see IMO and IMHO as strategms for evading responsibility for the opinions expressed. "Don't blame me if I've trampled all over your precious music. It's just my opinion."

Disingenuous.)

Far as I can see, the situation is that objectivity is taken as a good, as the goal to which all our discussions must aspire. That subjectivity (often presented as "mere subjectivity") is seen as bad, as hopelessly fuzzy and useless and dubious. That view of those two concepts has created an absurdity that everyone's witnessed, that of a big pile of opinions (the bigger the pile, the better) somehow turning magically into a fact.

Bach is the greatest composer.

"Great" is a particular kind of word. It is not a fact; it is a judgment. It is thus not a quality, it is a conclusion, an assessment, based (or so one must hope) on the facts. It is not, however, a fact itself. It's not that kind of word. And no piling up of similar opinions about Bach will ever turn "greatest composer" into anything but a value judgment.

It is much likelier that iron can be turned into gold.

If we worship OBJECTIVITY, as we do, then of course any of our opinions that we really cherish and value (!) must obviously be given the quality of objectivity, even though opinions by their very nature are simply and irreducibly subjective. It is this tension, far as I've been able to determine, that makes for "the confusion" Polednice has remarked.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

O ryt, okay. Cheers fnx bai.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

some guy said:


> If we worship OBJECTIVITY, as we do, then of course any of our opinions that we really cherish and value (!) must obviously be given the quality of objectivity, even though opinions by their very nature are simply and irreducibly subjective. It is this tension, far as I've been able to determine, that makes for "the confusion" Polednice has remarked.


I'm not sure that any statement about a piece of music can be objective. Can music exist without being heard, appreciated, understood? It's the "a tree falls in a forest, but there's no one to hear it, so does it make a sound?" argument. If it has to be perceived then, inevitably, the prejudices, judgments and experiences of the listener will irretrievably colour his or her perception.

If I assert that K491 is a great piano concerto, and people agree with me, it is still just an opinion. It is not more objective the more people agree with me. Or is it? If everyone can see the greatness (whether or not I point it out), does the music have a quality of greatness or not? I genuinely don't know the answer (read, I don't think there is an answer).

--
Incidentally the corollary to the "tree in forest" problem goes like this: A man says something, but there is no woman to hear him. Is he still wrong?


----------



## Conor71 (Feb 19, 2009)

I don't know if its just me but I find the speculation is fun and can give you a bit of insight about the personality of the Poster - This can cause arguments too of course but thats what the board is all about! 
I enjoy the nice threads and the heated debates in about equal measure and try to read them all where possible (although I do stay away from some of the threads in the community forum because they can become a bit unwieldy!)


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Conor71 said:


> I don't know if its just me but I find the speculation is fun and can give you a bit of insight about the personality of the Poster - This can cause arguments too of course but thats what the board is all about!
> I enjoy the nice threads and the heated debates in about equal measure and try to read them all where possible (although I do stay away from some of the threads in the community forum because they can become a bit unwieldy!)


It gives a lot of insight into the personality of the poster--too much in some cases!!!


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Jeremy Marchant said:


> ...If it has to be perceived then, inevitably, the prejudices, judgments and experiences of the listener will irretrievably colour his or her perception...


I think that perception is the most important, developing perception. Anybody can listen to or hear piece of music, but it takes time to perceive it. Esp. on a deeper level.

I'd add that music is of use or has meaning to me if it says something to me, eg. is relevant to my life. So I relate it to my life or world view. I think that's better than just saying something is rubbish or something like that. By the same token, canonising, fetishising and building shrines and cults to a composer is the other extreme.

I try to say something about my music relating it to my experience. But sometimes I get very emotional and an "absolute judgement" may slip out. It - or **** - happens. That's life. I've told acquaintances into classical music about my disdain for things like that I see as anachronisms and irrelevant to me, or even repugnant. Eg. wig opera, or Wagner. Some agree, some stay silent, some disagree. There'll always be a mix of opinions. Some people will validate you, other's may not, others in the middle (eg. many simply don't care about Wagner or wig opera, one way or the other). But sometimes I like stirring the pot. I said to a mate that when he went to see wig opera live, the orchestra tuning up must have been the best part. WE both laughed.

I think if we're too serious about these things, then we just have these sacred cows, which is kind of boring. I even understand criticisms of composers I like, but if they're done from an angle of almost or complete ignorance or pure malice, then that's when I start lashing out and things get a bit nasty. But that always only happens online, I have never had it done in my face in reality, but I can put up with people eg. saying Stockhausen, Cage or Schoenberg did "wierd ****" or something of the sort, because in real life it's never been done with malice in my face, it's been done in a way of it being in the person's experience, simple as that...


----------



## Rasa (Apr 23, 2009)

There are still objective criterea in music. So sometimes, it's a matter of knowledge, relativists notwithstanding.

If a form is complex or not. If thematical developement is elaborate or not. If there is an interesting harmonical construction. If the orchestration is lush or sparse. If music contains counterpoint and how many voices of it at the same time.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

Polednice said:


> I know some of you like to moralise and deal in absolutes, so it's not always an assumption that can be accurately made.


Well, I TRY not to-- but in the case of things like the _Horst Wessel Lied_, (and one could also add all manner of Stalin-era "Socialist Realism" mediocrities here, too), I think moral context has a legitimate place at the discussion-table.

Generally speaking, I prefer posting about my positive experiences. Others may have different preferences. For instance, one of the more famous opera-bloggers admitted a preference to writing negative reviews. This person argued that identifying that which was worthy of criticism was easy to articulate, but to give a "rave-review" was much more difficult to put into words- like trying to explain WHY you are in love.

To which I'd reply- _DON'T let yourself be put off by the difficulty._ *Challenge yourself.*

I don't think in terms of needing to "evangelize" for Classical Music- but really-- put yourself in the position of a Classical Music newcomer, looking at comments for the first time. Are you more likely to explore such music if you read positive things (no matter how ordinarily expressed), or negative things (no matter how brilliantly expressed)?


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

You know me, Poles...everything I say here is 'in my opinion'; I don't like to use web-type abbreviations. Still, when it comes to certain performances by certain performers my opinion is basically the way you stated it: _"absolutely, no matter whose experience we are talking about."_


----------



## Ravellian (Aug 17, 2009)

Of course everything is an opinion and there is no absolute 100% objective truth when it comes to assessing the quality of music. 

That doesn't mean there can't be very persuasive arguments made by people with well-informed/educated opinions. And of course the opinions of "uneducated" (but unprejudiced) listeners are important as well. If opinions didn't mean anything, then we wouldn't have anything to discuss now, would we?


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

mmsbls said:


> YES!
> 
> When I was in high school and learning to write essays, my teacher told us that we shouldn't write things like "in my opinion" or "I believe". Of course it's your opinion because it's your essay. I tend not to include IMO because I think that's obvious. But of course there is a difference between saying "I like Mozart" and "Mozart's piano concertos, as a set, are superior to all others" (both true, of course ). The former can _only_ be my opinion. The latter could be argued using musical ideas. So I could be saying "I like Mozart's piano concertos better than all others" or "Mozart's piano concertos are better because of music idea A, B, C, etc." The second can be argued, but the first cannot.
> 
> ...


_In my opinion_ your teacher was wrong.

It is a good thing to signal the strength of our confidence in an idea. "In my opinion" means something: "I am not as confident in the following statement as I am about some of my other, more objectively verifiable, beliefs."

You and your classmates might have used it too often, making yourselves seem unnecessarily timid, or you might have used it improperly, meaning nothing by it. So maybe he was right to tell you not to use it. But that doesn't mean phrases like that should never be used.

I take the opposite approach with my own students, actually. I encourage them to think carefully about how confident they are in their claims, and to use words like "probably" and "maybe." They don't need to pretend to be absolutely sure of everything they write. Speculation is not a sin.

Another issue is that sometimes we want to signal an awareness that something is a matter of taste. There really is a meaningful and sometimes important difference between declaring that the coffee is too weak, and declaring that it is too weak for me.

And thus: "That music is too sappy" is different from both, "That music is too sappy for me," and from, "In my opinion, that music is too sappy."

But then, _I think_ we've missed the central point, or what is for me the central point. I really don't care if someone doesn't like some music as much as I do, or as much as someone else does - and I think a lot of people feel similarly: my wife doesn't really care if I don't like Celine Dion as much as she does. I could even say, "That music is too sappy," though I think she'd be much happier with a "for me" or an "in my opinion" qualifier. Anyway, if I were to go a step further and explicitly insult her for liking that music ("You have bad taste," or "You're ignorant about music"), then an undeniable boundary has been transgressed.

Of course an average adult is capable of implying an insult rather than stating it explicitly.


----------



## Guest (Dec 17, 2011)

Ah, if only there were more average adults here....

Anyway



Rasa said:


> There are still objective criterea in music. So sometimes, it's a matter of knowledge, relativists notwithstanding.
> 
> If a form is complex or not. If thematical developement is elaborate or not. If there is an interesting harmonical construction. If the orchestration is lush or sparse. If music contains counterpoint and how many voices of it at the same time.


How is it that the "relativist" ad populum pops up every time there's a conversation about "objective" and "subjective"? Now, I enjoy non sequiturs as much as the next guy (there should really be a poster named "next guy," don't you think?), but really. This one is so jejune.*

As for those criteria, well, least said soonest mended I guess.... I just want to go on record as saying my tongue is bleeding all over my shirt now, that's all.

*If you have identified this as an opinion, then "great job!"


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

In my opinion, while this thread was possibly meant to eliminate confusion I am perhaps more confused than when I first opened it. Not about my opinions, though. They are firm as ever. 

About the teacher saying not to write this phrase in essays; that teacher was actually correct in doing so not only for the grammatical reasons but also for what Science stated about its improper use and overuse. 

I do not feel it is at all necessary in forums such as this where we are all here to share our opinions. Here, it is used as a defense mechanism to avoid confrontation so that when people read 'imo' they aren't as tempted to argue with that person as they would be with someone like me who writes things such as: Earl Wild played and recorded the Chopin Etudes better than anyone, ever...period.

Now, when I see 'imho' I really get scared because unless you use this disclosure does that mean you've been lying to me and yourself on all the other posts? Anyway. It's really just a matter of habit and how one likes to express themselves.


----------



## CameraEye (Nov 18, 2011)

Every time I write "in my opinion" I mean "in my opinion", that is: "I am convinced". But other opinions are welcome too and may make me change my mind. In my opinion, an opinion is not a matter of fact and that is what I actually mean when using the expression. In a forum I appreciate both subjective and objective comments, depending on the issue. If I aimed at mere objectiveness, which is relative, I would make use of other sources. A forum is a place where we can discuss and share, not only objective knowledge but feelings and emotions too. A lack of subjective ideas, however illogical they might seem, would make this forum a very dull place for virtual interaction. I imagine each of us contributes the best way we know.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

So the moral of the story is: if anyone says something mean about some music you like, don't get all silly and defensive, "IMHO" is implied.


----------



## Guest (Dec 17, 2011)

Flippant comment deleted by author.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I can agree with the notion that "In My Opinion" is implied (or we can assume it is implied)... but then again we get the continual statements such as "Beethoven complete dwarfs Mozart" followed by a slew of "facts" intended to back up the initial statement and support the notion that the author's statement is not merely opinion, but "fact". Or we get the suggestions that this or that opinion is but the result of faulty thinking or a flawed approach to listening (the someguy approach) which again crosses over the line of merely expressing personal opinion. Honestly, I have no problem with the heated debates and disputes about music. I think such are only to be expected when debating the merits of something many of us feel so passionately about. As an artist (painter) I have engaged in any number of these at the evening's end with other artists. I think the advantage there is that these disputes take place over beer and pizza... face to face... Such debates... whether face to face or over the internet have some real value in that they certainly force us to think through on our position... to be clear in our own minds as to why we believe one way of another. There is even the value, on rare occasion, of coming to a compromise... a new understanding... or even a complete reversal when facts don't support our view (although that certainly appears to be rare in on line disputes).


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> I can agree with the notion that "In My Opinion" is implied (or we can assume it is implied)... but then again we get the continual statements such as "Beethoven complete dwarfs Mozart" followed by a slew of "facts" intended to back up the initial statement and support the notion that the author's statement is not merely opinion, but "fact".


This is my problem, really. In _most_ cases - certainly with people I speak to in real life, or folks here who I know fairly well through their posting - I can tell what kind of tone is intended and how they think on these issues of objectivity and subjectivity. However, we still get a number of threads comparing the "Greatness" of X and Y (as though it's a reasonable question), and this throws a spanner in the works. What am I to think when that kind of question is asked? It's open to the interpretations I set out in my original post. That's why I tend to have a little disclaimer when I give an insincere response to those threads stating how I've interpreted the question. If someone asks "Who was the greatest composer?" and I say "Brahms", I don't want it to be thought that I have a hundred empirical observations to demonstrate the fact.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

If someone asks "Who was the greatest composer?" and I say "Brahms", I don't want it to be thought that I have a hundred empirical observations to demonstrate the fact.

Especially not when confronted by a Wagnerian armed with 200 empiracle observations in support of Wagner...

To say nothing of the worshiper of Bach who realizes that Bach's preeminence is so indisputable that the mere thought of needing to present "facts" in his support verges upon blasphemy.:lol:


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Such debates... whether face to face or over the internet have some real value in that they certainly force us to think through on our position... to be clear in our own minds as to why we believe one way of another. There is even the value, on rare occasion, of coming to a compromise... a new understanding... or even a complete reversal when facts don't support our view (although that certainly appears to be rare in on line disputes).


These two statements are the main reason I debate. A slight problem online is that it is sometimes difficult for both sides to focus on the identical issue, and they end up arguing different things causing some frustration. It is much easier to correct this in person. Nevertheless, various debates here have been enormously valuable to me, and I believe I have changed some of my vviews on music.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Ravellian said:


> Of course everything is an opinion and there is no absolute 100% objective truth when it comes to assessing the quality of music.
> 
> That doesn't mean there can't be very persuasive arguments made by people with well-informed/educated opinions. And of course the opinions of "uneducated" (but unprejudiced) listeners are important as well. *If opinions didn't mean anything, then we wouldn't have anything to discuss now, would we?*


I think the last line is important. This is why I like to read books on music, although sometimes the analysis can get way above my non-trained head (music wise that is).

Eg. a fresh opinion, well argued, can blow away many cobwebs. & often they are based on facts & corroborated by my listening.

Eg. Bruckner was original before he heard _Tannhauser_ and ended up kneeling at Wagner's feet after the performance. His studies of early choral and organ music already had gotten Bruckner's style going. I don't buy into the still widespread opinion that Bruckner was like a symphonic version (or even rehash) of Wagner. That is nowhere near accurate, it is superficial analysis at best. Bruckner had many other influences, eg. Palestrina, Gabrielli, Schutz, and of course the usual suspects (eg. J.S. Bach). Surprisingly, Bruckner never studied a score of Beethoven until he came to write his_ String Quintet in C_, he studied the late quartets.

Anyway, to cut a long story short, an opinion that gets away from our stereotypical "enshrined" or "entombed" opinions of a composer, which is informed by experience and facts, is much more interesting and useful than just the usual lists, high falutin' jargon, dates, all this kind of waffle. Same old same old.

So that's what I look out for in opinions on music - a combination of things, and some members here have opened up my eyes to different ways of thinking for sure. Thinking outside the box doesn't have to come from a scholar or musician or someone with thousands of cd's, all you need to do that is the grey matter between your ears...


----------



## Rasa (Apr 23, 2009)

some guy said:


> Ah, if only there were more average adults here....
> 
> Anyway
> 
> ...


Since everybody is jumping over themselves to declare the subjectivity of their opinions and criterea for music, I thought I'd add some things that can be objectively assessed in music. Sequit.

As for the quality of the criterea I mentioned, I'll just leave this image here:


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

^^Yeah but wouldn't you get the same sort of outcome if you say compared something like a "total serialist" piece with all that non repetitive complexity from post-1945 decades to say something by Philip Glass or Arvo Part closer to now? I'm not commenting on the specifics of your comparison, I'm just throwing this out there, turning it back to the classical music realm...


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Sid James said:


> ^^Yeah but wouldn't you get the same sort of outcome if you say compared something like a "total serialist" piece with all that non repetitive complexity from post-1945 decades to say something by Philip Glass or Arvo Part closer to now? I'm not commenting on the specifics of your comparison, I'm just throwing this out there, turning it back to the classical music realm...


I think it would be more useful to take Rasa's post as an analogy to music _within a single style_ rather than across completely different styles. There is likely to be good serialism and crap serialism.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

^^Well then, not to complicate, what does bebop jazz have to do with rap or hip hop or whatever it is? Wouldn't it be better to compare say a jazz sax player of the 1960's with one of today? Is this kind of comparison yet another one to ram home some kind of point? That's what I'm saying, & that's what's usually on my mind when people make these kinds of comparisons...

[EDIT - and what about the fusions of jazz and hip hop, eg. the now departed MC Guru's series of jazzamatazz albums (of which I'm quite a fan)]...


----------



## Rasa (Apr 23, 2009)

I'll be honest, I just wanted to post that picture.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

^^Well we're all "guilty" of doing that type of thing around here. I don't want to be a killjoy, Rasa! :lol: ...


----------



## CameraEye (Nov 18, 2011)

Polednice said:


> So the moral of the story is: if anyone says something mean about some music you like, don't get all silly and defensive, "IMHO" is implied.


I think we can criticize composers and their music without being mean or rude. A bit of tact is always desirable to avoid hurting other people´s feelings. If someone said something mean about some music I like, I would react (silly and defensive) trying to refute that opinion but not taking it as something personal. Of course, we cannot be offensive and get away with it by adding "IMHO" -))


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

^^Yeah well I feel "imo" lets me off the hook a bit, esp. if I'm saying something I think may be controversial. In natural face to face conversation I do that kind of thing but in other ways, with other tools (eg. facial expression, etc.). But as you suggest, there's balance involved, something like say going against the rules of the forum and adding "imo" would not mean you are breaking the rules any less...


----------

