# A different method of viewing music



## Classicalophile (Mar 15, 2015)

After the many lists and scathing critiques of composers and music, I cannot help but to post this in response.

Music is emotion. One is drawn to a work because of that emotion, that power that music evokes within us. It just may be that a certain piece, no matter how obscure, may speak to some person and whisper a certain fragment that only a singular human being in the universe can truly hear-a fragment that is reminiscent of any personal feeling, whether it be a warm childhood memory or a stone cold feud. This feeling created within us is something that none can take away and it is ludicrous to compare it to any other feeling created by the oeuvre of another composer. Calling a composer of any sort bad is shallow; it is simply that the emotion of the music they create resonates little in the accuser. This evokes the cliche: "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". 

There truly is no 'bad' music, including even the pop music of today that many would say pushes the boundary of what is termed 'music'. No matter the degree to which myself and others may harbor distaste for such music, it doesn't make this music 'bad', it simply indicates personal preference. In the same way, it is impossible to place Mahler, a personal favorite, as 102 out of 200 'top' composers, as stated by one poster. The music Mahler and all of the other thousands of composers that exist is truly unique, and comparing them is fruitless and shallow.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Classicalophile said:


> Music is emotion. One is drawn to a work because of that emotion, that power...


Well, sorry but music is _not _emotion. It's music. It may evoke an emotion, or a state of mind, or simply aesthetic pleasure. It can be useful for marching off to war, for attaining a worshipful mood, or simply for dancing. I could go on...

Your view seems quite limiting.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Classicalophile said:


> In the same way, it is impossible to place Mahler, a personal favorite, as 102 out of 200 'top' composers, as stated by one poster. The music Mahler and all of the other thousands of composers that exist is truly unique, and comparing them is fruitless and shallow.


I suspect that poster is simply saying Mahler is his 102nd favorite composer. It is possible to compare the response you receive from various co posers, saying I like this more than that. This level of precision seems absurd, but often these lists are larks.


----------



## Celloman (Sep 30, 2006)

To an extent, I would agree with you. While it's true that a composer can resonate with one person while remaining shallow for another, I do believe that it's good to compare one composer to another and even evaluate them according to one's own idea of what "good" music sounds like. This process helps someone to form their own opinion, which, although they may not be more valid than the opinions of another, are still an essential part of the process of analyzing and enjoying music.

Calling one piece better than another is a valuable subjectivity. We need criticism in order to keep music alive.


----------



## Classicalophile (Mar 15, 2015)

I apologize, I should have been more clear, I was referencing this ridiculous post: http://www.talkclassical.com/16008-tc-top-200-composers-2.html


----------



## TradeMark (Mar 12, 2015)

Classicalophile said:


> I apologize, I should have been more clear, I was referencing this ridiculous post: http://www.talkclassical.com/16008-tc-top-200-composers-2.html


I thought that thread was a joke, I mean it says it says it right there at the end.


----------



## Classicalophile (Mar 15, 2015)

Unfortunately, it seems that the op was entirely serious, the comments on the first page make that clear. However, he was not taken seriously at all and the thread was treated as a joke.


----------



## Classicalophile (Mar 15, 2015)

KenOC said:


> Well, sorry but music is _not _emotion. It's music. It may evoke an emotion, or a state of mind, or simply aesthetic pleasure. It can be useful for marching off to war, for attaining a worshipful mood, or simply for dancing. I could go on...
> 
> Your view seems quite limiting.


May you elaborate? For me it is hard to see music any other way. Personally, as a musician, it would be hard to interpret a piece without recognizing the emotion the composer placed into the piece. Perhaps I am biased, but I am interested in your opinion.


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

I also disagree with this emotionalist approach to music, and I think that we must not confuse our responses to a given thing with the inherent qualities of that thing. Emotional response to music is natural and involuntary, and through the listening experience music can appear to act as a vessel for these responses, however, the music itself cannot contain these things because they are extramusical.

My feeling is that the listening experience is related to but separate from the music itself, being in a sense a new composition, a hybrid of the music (or more correctly an interpretation of the music) and the perception of the listener.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Classicalophile said:


> May you elaborate? For me it is hard to see music any other way. Personally, as a musician, it would be hard to interpret a piece without recognizing the emotion the composer placed into the piece. Perhaps I am biased, but I am interested in your opinion.


What emotions do you feel when playing Bach's Musical Offering? To me that's music with a primarily aesthetic appeal. And when you play the slow movement of Beethoven's String Quartet Op. 59 No. 3? Again, I see that as primarily conjuring up a "state of mind."

Not to say you're wrong in interpreting these pieces emotionally, but IMO that's just you, not the music. To say that "music is emotion" is a statement about yourself, not about music.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

I hear music, but what emotion is that?

I cannot think of any classical piece that evokes "a warm childhood memory or a stone cold feud." Sure, there are passages in some works that might sound jubilant, sorrowful or whatever, but it is uncommon for that emotion to carry though an entire piece, or even a movement, in exactly that way. Most of the time, I could not identify the exact emotion a piece evokes.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Music is sound. Sound is air vibrations. Over time we've ordered our thoughts around sounds. There are some ordered thoughts that I like and others that I don't. Sometimes there is an intended sentiment, other times there is a vague impression of the originator's mind. There is no wrong approach to music, because there really is no objectively wrong way to order one's thoughts, either for the listener or the composer. Oftentimes there isn't much thought correlation between the creator and audience anyways, so IMO that doesn't much of anything objective about the music itself.

Do I feel that there are more constructive, life enriching approaches to music and that there is music more specifically geared toward such modes of thought? Absolutely. But on the other hand I fail to see any necessity or imperative here. There are all kinds of other ways for people to contemplate, learn, and generally enrich their lives.

Also, it's in our very nature to compare things and the way that we go about that can speak volumes about our own values (or it can say pretty much nothing). Faulting ourselves for this practice seems inane to me. Everyone does it, however much they criticize the extent and manner in which others do likewise.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Classicalophile said:


> May you elaborate? For me it is hard to see music any other way. Personally, as a musician, it would be hard to interpret a piece without recognizing the emotion the composer placed into the piece. Perhaps I am biased, but I am interested in your opinion.


I don't think it's possible to objectively recognise something which doesn't actually occur in the dots and lines you read on the page. I don't thinks it's possible to objectively recognise something other than sound, the source of sound and the structure of sound when hearing music. I think it _is_ possible to subjectively respond to music by describing emotions, however this is not a description of the music but rather a description of one's own reaction to it.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

No bad music, OP? Great to know! I'm taking out some composition paper right now!!!


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

hpowders said:


> No bad music, OP? Great to know! I'm taking out some composition paper right now!!!


Can you do that, actually? And then post your composition on TC? I really really want to see it!


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

hpowders said:


> No bad music, OP? Great to know! I'm taking out some composition paper right now!!!


Quickly everyone! Duck down before your head is sliced clean off!


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Yes, there is bad music. It's just that, as with all the arts, people a lot smarter than most here have wrestled unsuccessfully with how to define it. Just because you may prefer "Louie, Louie" to the overture to Figaro, or an Avengers comic to Dostoevsky, or a Holiday Inn print to anything in the Louvre (which is fine), doesn't mean that one isn't "better" than the other.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

MarkW said:


> Yes, there is bad music. It's just that, as with all the arts, people a lot smarter than most here have wrestled unsuccessfully with how to define it. Just because you may prefer "Louie, Louie" to the overture to Figaro, or an Avengers comic to Dostoevsky, or a Holiday Inn print to anything in the Louvre (which is fine), doesn't mean that one isn't "better" than the other.


If it cannot be defined, how do you conclude that there is bad music (or writing or art)? Other than the subjective "for me this is bad music".


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Art Rock said:


> If it cannot be defined, how do you conclude that there is bad music (or writing or art)? Other than the subjective "for me this is bad music".


You've hit the $64,000 question. But let's take it down to a less abstract plain. Would you agree that there's such a thing as bad writing?


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I simply don't think it is that useful to talk about these things in terms of good or bad. Without a definition to use for these words, what's the point? I could call something "bad in my opinion" though, within my own terms of reference.

What would you call bad writing without using your own terms of reference?


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Art Rock said:


> I simply don't think it is that useful to talk about these things in terms of good or bad. Without a definition to use for these words, what's the point? I could call something "bad in my opinion" though, within my own terms of reference.
> 
> What would you call bad writing without using your own terms of reference?


In other words, the difference between an A+ English paper and a C- is just a question of the writer's pandering to the teacher's taste?


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Addendum:

If you don't mind seeking out a 40-year old book that is well and gracefully written, has a compelling plot if you give yourself a chance to get into it, will cause you to think more than you ever have about concepts appropriate to this discussion, and you can get past the quirky title, read "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" by Robert W. Pirsig.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Classicalophile said:


> After the many lists and scathing critiques of composers and music, I cannot help but to post this in response. ...The music Mahler and all of the other thousands of composers that exist is truly unique, and comparing them is fruitless and shallow.


I agree with what I believe is the main thrust of you post - i.e. denigrating the music of any composer is not productive. I think it's fine to say that one doesn't enjoy, appreciate, or understand a composer's music, but calling any composer's music bad, garbage, or crap doesn't add anything beyond the fact that you dislike the music and may serve to infuriate others.

I do have a rather different take on the various lists of composers and especially musical works. The one post you mentioned was quite different from our other threads where many TC members essentially vote to construct lists of works or composers. It seems there are those who love the list games and those who don't. As one who does enjoy the lists, I don't see them as fruitless and shallow but rather as fun, interesting, and immensely valuable in discovering new works.

Those who play these games find them fun. That in itself is really a good reason for the existence of those threads. I personally find the results interesting - especially how diverse (or not) members tastes are. Finally, in my experience the best source of new works that I have enjoyed are lists on TC (and to some extent elsewhere).


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Lukecash12 said:


> Quickly everyone! Duck down before your head is sliced clean off!


I could write something atonal and it will be debated on TC for years as to its merit!!


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

hpowders said:


> I could write something atonal and it will be debated on TC for years as to its merit!!


Dear god in heaven, we need to snatch that coloring book right out of your hands, right now! If not you'll tell us your crayoned mermaid has inverted ninths...


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2015)

hpowders said:


> I could write something atonal and it will be debated on TC for years as to its merit!!


If I understand the latest theories correctly, you can't write atonal music because atonal music doesn't exist. It would be like sculpting something immaterial. I think.


----------



## music muse (May 2, 2015)

I totally agree with those saying that what kind of music someone prefers is subjective. Some like popular music, others like classical music,… . This, of course, has partly to do with our background. Depending on how we grew up, which kind of music our parents or brothers and sisters listen to, influence us. But also our friends' tastes and the social environment influence us. And besides these influences, I still think that we develop also our own music taste.
Concerning our emotions, … I don't really know, but maybe it has something to do with our present state of mind. Because depending on how I feel at a particular situation, I prefer this or that kind of music. Everyone has their own preferences.

I think also that which kind of music someone prefers can be compared with literature. There are so many different types of literature. And here again, some people prefer phantasy, others science fiction, others detectives, biographies, historic novels, … . Here you can't say that this sort of literature is bad just because it doesn't appeal to you.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

The fruitless exercise of comparing composers is just a way to find kindred spirits in the world, to start a conversation or at least to compare ourselves to others. It's a way of building a sense of community in a world that mostly rolls its eyes at rabid fans of any music genre. If we don't take it too seriously, I see no harm. I cannot begin to recount all the fabulous new works I've discovered participating in these "my composer has a bigger staff than your composer" discussions.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Edit: post deleted, never mind, this "discussion" is leading to nothing.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

There's no such thing as good or bad music.
But there is such a thing as widely-agreed-upon standards. Ultimately these are arbitrary, and are dependent on a lot of contexts, but they do exist. The less widely-agreed-upon the standards are, the more likely there'll be an argument over whether the music is good or bad.


----------



## sharik (Jan 23, 2013)

Classicalophile said:


> Calling a composer of any sort bad is shallow


if we take for example John Cage, it isn't the composer that leaves bad feeling, but the politics behind him and his likes.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Classicalophile said:


> Music is emotion. One is drawn to a work because of that emotion, that power that music evokes within us. ....


Great composers' music has powerful emotional content. That is a fact. That's why they constitute western classical music. Your view of great music is agreeable with listeners since centuries ago.


----------

