# Music that has no redeeming value



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

Can you think of any piece/s that you think that has no ''redeeming value'' musically? It could also have no redeeming value, emotionally, intellectualy etc..


This question bogs my mind when I define what is ''value'' in music. There are many debates regarding whether a certain film, tv show, album that has no redeeming value at all.

Or,

do you think all classical pieces have redeeming value all in all.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

How can you (or anyone else) pose this question without defining 'redemption'?


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

You mean a piece of music that depicts no sort of musical redemption? As in a piece that ends in chaos or despair?


----------



## Klavierspieler (Jul 16, 2011)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> You mean a piece of music that depicts no sort of musical redemption? As in a piece that ends in chaos or despair?


I thinks he's referring to worthless music.


----------



## Dimboukas (Oct 12, 2011)

I perceive it as _catharsis_, that is after listening to a piece of music and having been filled with many emotions, in the end, those emotions leave you as long as the ending is satisfactory. For example, listening to Overture 1812, you may feel anxious about the french advance but in the end this anxiety is gone since the triumphant music makes the Russian victory clear. So redemption or catharsis is a great change in emotions. Although, in my previous example, you may feel no anxiety anymore, it was a nice experience.


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

"No redeeming value" is just a cliche phrase that sounds more weighty than "bad".

How many people's days are brightened by tacky, tasteless, talentless pop that helps them carry on. Hearing your child sing happy birthday tunelessly is probably better than Beethoven for most people.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Klavierspieler said:


> I thinks he's referring to worthless music.


Well, music that ends in chaos and/or despair, I usually consider worthless too. :lol:


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

What I mean is:

For example, when I watch a movie that is full of gore (''Saw'' series came to mind). The film is just pure gore.. There is no story, no moral lesson, no artistry, just full of gore. It has no redeeming value at all. I just wasted 2 hours of my life watching that.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

peeyaj said:


> What I mean is:
> 
> For example, when I watch a movie that is full of gore (''Saw'' series came to mind). The film is just pure gore.. There is no story, no moral lesson, no artistry, just full of gore. It has no redeeming value at all. I just wasted 2 hours of my life watching that.


Possibly some of Berg's operas which contain _stories _pretty much like that. People may argue the music redeems those plots, but I would beg to differ.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

@quack

Yah. I was referring to that. Nice analogy, btw.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> Possibly some of Berg's operas which contain _stories _pretty much like that. People may argue the music redeems those plots, but I would beg to differ.


Lulu came to my mind. Strauss' Salome, too. The music redeems it somewhat, but the plot, the scene in which Salome kisses the head of John the Baptist, ruined it to me..


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

peeyaj said:


> Do you think all classical pieces have redeeming value all in all.


I don't think just because music is written for a certain genre makes it inherently more worthwhile. There are classical pieces which are not worth hearing. I remember hearing a radio program which played early experiments in chromaticism from the Baroque era, and I remember them as being pretty lame.

Fortunately, most of the worthless classical pieces have been thrown on the trash-heap of time, so we don't have to encounter them.

As far as other music, I'd consider it nonredeeming if it's used for propaganda purposes, promoting detestable dogmas like racism, or encouraging you to leave your sense and reason behind and unquestionably follow the masses.


----------



## Stargazer (Nov 9, 2011)

There was some piece of music that I saw posted on this site once (I can't remember the name but it started with an X) that was basically like 8min of these deafening screeching/scratching sounds. I couldn't tell if it was some kind of a joke or if it was actually a serious piece of music lol, it so bad I think my ears were literally bleeding after about 30s of it!


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

I remember that youtube too. It was posted to defend the idea of noise being music.


----------



## Hausmusik (May 13, 2012)

Stargazer said:


> I couldn't tell if it was some kind of a joke or if it was actually a serious piece of music lol, it so bad I think my ears were *literally *bleeding after about 30s of it!


Literally?


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

ADD: quoting my friend and colleague J.M. Cahill, "Music should do two things: Hold your attention; make you feel something.

I think there is nothing 'certain' of 'irredeemably bad.' as far as naming a quality.

I do think there is something quite different in 'bad music,' but would have to say it is in the area of the 'badly' done music, very much at a student or amateur level.

The current 'state of music' and technology now allows for pieces to be up and heard -- composed by amateur and self-taught composers in all genres. There are hosts of pieces, ditties, etc from those who are not really ready to present their works, but for whom YouTube, Soundcloud, etc. makes it all too easy to post works which decades before would not have been heard outside the classroom. The classroom and university and conservatory USED to be the place you could safely say one might hear work which really had 'no redeeming value.'

This is the sort of 'bad music', regardless of genre, where it is simply 'failed,' i.e. it did not succeed at all, and many recognize these pieces as, 'well, back to the drafting board 

As for any other judgements, pre-revision, I had named some great composers who 'just don't do it for me. So - my 'evaluation' of them is as 'not much.' I know there are 'merits' in the works of those composers who 'don't do it for me,' but find in them nothing of value -- To Me.

There are some popular and 'second tier' composers whose works are also enjoyed, and some people, therefore, find them 'worthwhile.'

I think answers naming specific works are going to be very subjective.

I can say I think the world would not have missed a thing if Andrew LLoyd Weber had never written a note, but that is very much about MY taste, for example -- subjective, again.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

/\ Hah. There you go. Any thread that invites 'negatives' as does "Music that has no redeeming value", will result in posts of Brutal Frankness. There is no way for a member like myself (all sweetness and light) to express himself.


----------



## cwarchc (Apr 28, 2012)

The issue here is the "subjective" nature of the original question
Every piece of music has some "some redeeming" value to somebody, even if it's only the composer.
What you "really" want is what people don't "like"
?????????


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

cwarchc said:


> The issue here is the "subjective" nature of the original question
> Every piece of music has some "some redeeming" value to somebody, even if it's only the composer.
> What you "really" want is what people don't "like"
> ?????????


Well, probably not. I don't like anything Wagner composed ... but there must be _some_ redeeming value in there, somewhere.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

peeyaj said:


> Can you think of any piece/s that you think that has no ''redeeming value'' musically? It could also have no redeeming value, emotionally, intellectualy etc..


Stockhausen's _Helicopter String Quartet_. I think it has zip musical qualities but at least it does _look_ spectacular following the composer's original performance intention.

Is this what you meant?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> Well, music that ends in chaos and/or despair, I usually consider worthless too. :lol:


Why, for Heaven's sake? Some of the greatest stories end in despair and chaos---you must look at real life sometimes.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

peeyaj said:


> Can you think of any piece/s that you think that has no ''redeeming value'' musically? It could also have no redeeming value, emotionally, intellectualy etc..
> 
> ....


It is very subjective, but what I don't like is if a composer applies the carbon paper too much. Eg. produces many works that are basically the same. In other words, rehash. I don't mean just a few works, I mean many works over a long space of time (eg. decades). Such is the case with some of these _Holy Minimalists_, who in the 1970's and '80's where doing interesting things, but about mid-1990's they passed their use-by (or best-before) date. What was once interesting and engaging is now old and stale and has been done to death a million times. & it's even spawned rehash of this style from younger composers, so it's like going on and on. Ad nauseum.

Don't get me wrong, I have little time for the _Helicopter Quartet_, but I do like other works by Stockhausen which I've heard. At least he was not just doing rehash. Eg. he didn't to my knowledge do an airplane quartet or a motorbike quartet or jet-ski quartet or whatever. That's what I mean, composing is an art not an assembly line in a factory. Well today it isn't, not for the majority of newer music listened to by members of this forum, I'd say.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Well, probably not. I don't like anything Wagner composed ... but there must be _some_ redeeming value in there, somewhere.


Wagner's music is all about redemption!


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

moody said:


> Why, for Heaven's sake? Some of the greatest stories end in despair and chaos---you must look at real life sometimes.


Drat responded to wrong party!


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> Well, music that ends in chaos and/or despair, I usually consider worthless too. :lol:


I find that outlook / use of art rather superficial. It is alright, but I would take you off the list of listeners who are 'the earnest aficionadi.'

If that is a main criteria of yours for what you listen to, you are using music as a palliative vs. really allowing a full confrontation with strong art, beautiful or 'otherwise.'

That preference you've more than implied is more a sort of 'cherry picking' for your own comfort zones, and it is not really 'getting into' art if you do not allow art to be itself, on its own terms.

You've almost accidentally stumbled upon a statement more fitting to fans of new-age music, where all is always pleasant, sunny and simply sweet  I know that is not what you really meant, but the statement almost presents like that


----------



## LordBlackudder (Nov 13, 2010)

its not possible.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

PetrB said:


> I find that outlook / use of art rather superficial. It is alright, but I would take you off the list of listeners who are 'the earnest aficionadi.'
> 
> If that is a main criteria of yours for what you listen to, you are using music as a palliative vs. really allowing a full confrontation with strong art, beautiful or 'otherwise.'
> 
> ...


Hey, here's a nitpick: If 'redeeming value' implies some form of redemption (how could it not?), then Tchaikovsky's 6th Symphony has none.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Maybe music is inherently worthwhile. There is music that I don't like - I'm currently listening to Joni Mitchell's album _Wild Things Run Fast_ for about the fifth time in my life, and it has never done anything for me.

The phrase "no redeeming value" makes me think of situations where something is really bad (immoral) in some way, and doesn't have anything to make up for it. For instance, the advertising industry manipulates us, lies to us, degrades women most of the time and men some of the time, establishes status symbols that honor wealth rather than character, etc., but it has redeeming value because it persuades people to spend their life working productively in order to buy those products.

If I think of music strictly speaking, it's hard for me to see how it would need redeeming value. Of course a lot of music was produced in order to glorify and legitimize ruling classes (such as traditional liturgical music, or the music used in Lexus ads), or has been used to promote hatred, violence, irresponsible sex, and so on, but I can't see that as the music's own fault.

But if we take the larger picture, and include the whole social significance of the music, then there must be a lot of music with no redeeming value - it's easy to pick on some of the rap music that glorifies violence and wealth while degrading women without having any social or ethical message, so I will do that at this time. The truth is that kind of thing can be found in all sorts of music, including classical music that uses the Psalms of divine wrath. ("Smite them with destruction!" "Break their teeth," etc.) Or, if we're willing to take a Manichean stance in a fight, then we might say e.g. the music composed to motivate Confederate soldiers had no redeeming value. But again, I would do this kind of thing only reluctantly: instead I'd say that good music can be used badly.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I couldn't care less if a composer "repeats" or "rehashes" earlier ideas... as long as the result is interesting. Monet spent decades painting water-lilies, Degas spent at least as long painting ballerinas. Very few composers offer up an oeuvre in which their later work is drastically different from their early mature work. Most artists spend a great majority of their career exploring a few major themes/ideas/subjects. The only time this becomes a problem is if there wasn't much there to start with... or if the artist begins to lose interest in seriously exploring the possibilities of his or here theme, and instead fall into a sort of mechanical repetition. Here I would think of an artist like Andy Warhol.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

science said:


> ...
> ... instead I'd say that good music can be used badly.


It's the chicken and egg thing. Is it the music or the ideology that is _bad_? Sometimes I can't tell the difference. Ultimately we have to judge for ourselves. But I try to avoid my ideologies hardening into dogma. That's where it gets tricky and becomes a gordian knot. You can't untangle it. We all have our limitiations. But seriously, there's so much great music out there, it's an embarrasment of riches. We're spoilt for choice. So it's not black vs. white. No redeeming value or fully redeeming. Many things to start off with are in-between for me, then over time I grow to appreciate and love them more.


----------



## Moira (Apr 1, 2012)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> I couldn't care less if a composer "repeats" or "rehashes" earlier ideas... as long as the result is interesting. Monet spent decades painting water-lilies, Degas spent at least as long painting ballerinas.


If I could have any painting in the world to hang in my home I would probably choose a Degas ballerina.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

peeyaj said:


> Can you think of any piece/s that you think that has no ''redeeming value'' musically? It could also have no redeeming value, emotionally, intellectualy etc..
> 
> This question bogs my mind when I define what is ''value'' in music. There are many debates regarding whether a certain film, tv show, album that has no redeeming value at all.
> 
> ...


Wow, I think that I need to become an ostrich after reading this and bury my head in the sand. Definitely dug in the wrong archives.


----------

