# objective and subjective...anyone think like me?



## Kjetil Heggelund (Jan 4, 2016)

I guess these are words that I define differently to what has been written on TC lately. Take away the word "greatness" in this context. I see it as 2 different ways to approach music. One is the music expressed through the musician and the other is the musician expressed through the music. See?


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> I see it as 2 different ways to approach music. One is the music expressed through the musician and the other is the musician expressed through the music. See?


I think they are one and the same. You can't ever separate the music from the performer or the listener; everyone interprets music differently. Even if you were to put a score into a computer program, the music is still reflected by the way the computer operates.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> I guess these are words that I define differently to what has been written on TC lately. Take away the word "greatness" in this context. I see it as 2 different ways to approach music. One is the music expressed through the musician and the other is the musician expressed through the music. See?


I understand what you are saying, but I am not sure if I agree or not.

But neither has anything to do with subjectivity and objectivity, no matter how much those concepts are stretched. At least as far as I can tell.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

I think this perspective is at the very least a good breath of fresh air into the objective/subjective discussion which grows tiresome and leads to the rehashing of the same arguments.

Funnily enough, I was actually thinking of something similar today when I was thinking about the Bach Cello Suites. Obviously one of their unique qualities is that they kend themselves to many different interpretations, but I was thinking about how when I first played them I naïvely thought of them as a blank canvas for my own expression. In my opinion, nothing could be further from the truth! There's an objectively correct way to express and interpret them and the job of the interpreter is to best bring out what Bach intended. One can still be self expressive with them at the same time though, it's a strange paradox that escapes description. 

I think the experience on the listener's end is subjective. I think of the band Joy Division's final album, Closer, which in hindsight was a musical suicide note, given that the singer Ian Curtis offed himself directly after the album was done. But his bandmates who recorded the album with him actually thought the music was uplifting until their dear friend committed suicide. Context plays a large role in how people think and perceive music

As for the "objective/subjective" debate in terms of music's quality, I kinda dont care. I think there's objective criteria that can determine that music is objectively good, but the subjective listening experience is really what matters the most at the end of the day. You can open your mind and learn to appreciate music you previously disliked, but if you don't enjoy something, you simply dont enjoy it and that's that. If Three 6 Mafia or Mötley Crue speak to your soul more than Bach or you just simply like them more than Bach can I really fault them? If that person tried to make the claim they were superior composers to Bach, that's no longer subjective, but I doubt many people are trying to do that.


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund (Jan 4, 2016)

In my brain, the subjective way is to take great liberty in expressing the score, while the objective way is to try to follow the score as precisely as one can. I think both ways are great, but like the objective way best. I also call this romantic and classical interpretation.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> In my brain, the subjective way is to take great liberty in expressing the score, while the objective way is to try to follow the score as precisely as one can. I think both ways are great, but like the objective way best. I also call this romantic and classical interpretation.


I also think there's a way to strike a balance between the two.


----------



## Zhdanov (Feb 16, 2016)

GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> If Three 6 Mafia or Mötley Crue speak to your soul more than Bach


...then what are you doing on this forum?


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

Zhdanov said:


> ...then what are you doing on this forum?


Because I like classical music and talking about it and learning about it. Why is that mutually exclusive with believing people should enjoy what they enjoy?

(I like Three 6 Mafia btw, I'll admit genuinely like a lot of trashy music )


----------



## Zhdanov (Feb 16, 2016)

GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> Why is that mutually exclusive with believing people should enjoy what they enjoy?


the wrong forum to enjoy what you enjoy.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

Zhdanov said:


> the wrong forum to enjoy what you enjoy.


You and I clearly have much different ways of thinking about things. I'll leave it at that. I'm not offended either btw, though i'd imagine other people probably would be.


----------



## allaroundmusicenthusiast (Jun 3, 2020)

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> In my brain, the subjective way is to take great liberty in expressing the score, while the objective way is to try to follow the score as precisely as one can. I think both ways are great, but like the objective way best. I also call this romantic and classical interpretation.


I disagree with this, I don't believe there's anything such as "objective interpretation" even if you follow the score as is. The very word interpretation implies a subjectivity which is impossible to avoid or prevent. The only interpretation that is objective, i.e. that is factual, is the recording of a non-scored song or piece of music. That is, the recording cannot lie, and there's no mediation between what the musicians are doing and what comes out. From that moment on, anyway, that piece of music will be listened by a myriad of people, who will then interpret it as they wish or can.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> In my brain, the subjective way is to take great liberty in expressing the score, while the objective way is to try to follow the score as precisely as one can. I think both ways are great, but like the objective way best. I also call this romantic and classical interpretation.


There could be ten different pianists with ten different interpretations and all claiming to follow the score exactly as written. Like I said, even a computer's rendition of a score is still subjective to the computer's programming.

There is no way to tell who is objective or who is "truly" following the score.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Leonard Bernstein on the vagaries of score notation.

The opening minutes of this video may prove enlightening to some, as the conductor demonstrates different approaches to performing the Beethoven Third Symphony. There's much to consider in an interpretation, apparently.






As Bernstein explains, the score is only a dormant blueprint of the music which is only sparked into true realization or life by a performer or performers. Therein lie the choices necessary to interpretation.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> I guess these are words that I define differently to what has been written on TC lately. Take away the word "greatness" in this context. I see it as 2 different ways to approach music. One is the music expressed through the musician and the other is the musician expressed through the music. See?


The modern performer has a role to express old music in a way that makes sense to listeners. Glen Gould's _Goldberg Variations_ sounds very different to Jean Rondeau on a harpsichord. In this video clip, you can see Vladimir Horowitz in tears, while other performers might often not. This could be to do with the emotions of the performer who may have had personal attachment to the music for some reason. So I agree with what you wrote: there are indeed two different ways.


----------



## Tikoo Tuba (Oct 15, 2018)

I'd believe imagination is present until it is punished . The injury is objective .


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Tikoo Tuba said:


> I'd believe imagination is present until it is punished . The injury is objective .


Can you please give an example to help me understand your post?


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

SONNET CLV said:


> Leonard Bernstein on the vagaries of score notation.
> 
> The opening minutes of this video may prove enlightening to some, as the conductor demonstrates different approaches to performing the Beethoven Third Symphony. There's much to consider in an interpretation, apparently.
> 
> ...


Great little doc. Loved the Bach and the Farrell. Not a huge Stravinsky fan so I won't pass judgement on his interpretation of his own music. The most alarming thing about the film, and thank heavens we have moved on, was the fact that the whole orchestra comprised of middle aged white guys. Stravinsky must have felt quite at home because they all looked like serving KGB officers!


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

Barbebleu said:


> The most alarming thing about the film, and thank heavens we have moved on, was the fact that the whole orchestra comprised of middle aged white guys.


We've improved, but there's still a ways to go. A lot of the problems, unfortunately, are socioeconomic - it is very expensive to learn an instrument.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Tikoo Tuba said:


> I'd believe imagination is present until it is punished . The injury is objective .





ArtMusic said:


> Can you please give an example to help me understand your post?


I suspect that if you simply stare deeply into the eyes of your avatar, all will soon enough become quite clear.


----------



## Tikoo Tuba (Oct 15, 2018)

Imagination is punished by an evil piano teacher .

*The 5000 Fingers of Dr. T*

The 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T. is a 1953 American musical fantasy film about a boy who dreams himself into a fantasy world ruled by a diabolical piano teacher enslaving children to practice piano forever. It was the only feature film written by Theodor Seuss Geisel (Dr. Seuss), who wrote the story, screenplay and lyrics.

Music by: Frederick Hollander


----------



## Wilhelm Theophilus (Aug 8, 2020)

GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> Because I like classical music and talking about it and learning about it. Why is that mutually exclusive with believing people should enjoy what they enjoy?
> 
> (I like Three 6 Mafia btw, I'll admit genuinely like a lot of trashy music )


...Trashy music?


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund (Jan 4, 2016)

Maybe I should stop thinking like me or just rename my thoughts as romantic and classical...


----------



## Tikoo Tuba (Oct 15, 2018)

Maybe the kettle is black from the fire .


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> I guess these are words that I define differently to what has been written on TC lately. Take away the word "greatness" in this context. I see it as 2 different ways to approach music. One is the music expressed through the musician and the other is the musician expressed through the music. See?


I see. Its a balanced way to contrast object and subject, two sides of the same coin. Very good, and succinctly expressed.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

There are all kinds of metaphors and metaphorical ways of speaking about "subjective" and "objective." A lot of people, for example, take "objective" to mean something like "unbiased." Of course that's not the paradigmatic meaning, but in common speech it is used that way all the time, and understandably so. We can say the score is objective and the interpretation is subjective: another easily comprehensible metaphorical use of the terms, but not what they actually mean when we're being precise.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I'm convinced (subjectively so) that there is objectively great music. I also suspect that the passion some feel for arguing that all taste is subjective are suffering from some sort of inferiority complex because they can't get into something they believe they are supposed to like. These are the feelings and beliefs I find in myself. I don't see any value - or even possibility - in justifying them.


----------



## Tikoo Tuba (Oct 15, 2018)

Objectively it can be observed that the subjective may pretend to be objective . Subjectively
I will care or not about this .

Of the 3 related strings active in the forum I like this one .


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

I want to know since when all ancient people(who we had been) become so stereotyped as stupid and emotionally irrational that we need marxists to tell us we need to think critically. Since we know stoicism also proposed control of emotions, also dialecticism was first theorized by ancient greeks. It is good we have more scientifical tools today but it does not mean we have not been objective enough and can not adapt our mind to the latest scientifical development without being programmed into politically convenient fools ourself.


----------

