Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
No offense taken. It's part of working out the understanding and getting clear on what we mean. What you describe below is one of the things I find so fascinating about music and art, and why I believe it is such an amazing thing to do. We can all expect to excite, bore, offend, piss off, intrigue, fascinate, stimulate, turn on, repulse, put to sleep, motivate, influence, etc, etc, all sorts of people with our music. That's part of the landscape. Being a musician and performer, we have to accept that some people will simply abhore or dislike our music....but remember, this says nothing about your music inherently, but about the subjective reaction of the listener. When we confuse these two things, then we start degrading our art unnecessarily and unfairly. And the same goes for positive responses. People will rave about a particular artist or piece of music, and that artist will in turn use that reaction to promote their music as if it possessed that inherent positive quality, but in fact it all about the listener and not the music. This opens up the likelihood of some dishonest marketing. This diversity of reactions from listeners torments some artists (who strive for so called "perfection") and mass acceptance of their artform, but quickens others who thrive on diverse reactions to their art. In the end, it is what it is. Kris ----- Original Message ----- From: <phaslem@wightman.ca> To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2006 10:29 AM Subject: Re: Coffeehouse Guitar vs street-busker > Then again, you could just dismiss my mindless, subjective rambling as I > ponder > why it is that sometimes when I perform people stop and go "wow! what is > that???" and other times they just walk on by.... > > I wasn't trying to pick on anyone, and certainly wasn't trying to be > offensive. > > Paul > > > > > >> >> >> Quoting Krispen Hartung <khartung@cableone.net>: >> >>> >>> There was a time when I would have vehemently and completely agreed >with >>> you above, but my thinking has changed and softened up. I believe the >>> idea of having soul in your playing, being moved by music and having >>> notes grab you, is an entirely subjective and relative notion. A >piece >>> of music can be emotionally provocative or stirring for one person, >but >>> sterile and unmoving to another based on their individual and unique >>> emotional makeups. Therefore, I believe making blanket statements >about >>> certain types of music and playing approaches in regard to their >artist >>> merit and emotional impact are essentially vacuous and illegitimate. >If >>> you can find me one style of music or approach to playing that is as >you >>> say above to ALL listeners, then I would consider your point valid and >>> proven....good luck with that, however. ;) It is very difficult to >find >>> or legitimize universal or generalized value statements in art. Many >>> try, but end up betraying themselves in the long run for doing so. I >>> don't mean to come across as harsh or pedantic here, but statements >>> about the artistic or emotional impact of music do need to be >translated >>> and qualified as personal and subjective sentiment, and not factual >>> statements that denote actual characteristics of art. In my opinion, >>> there is no such thing as a factual value statement about a piece of >>> art, only factual statements that describe measureable or empirically >>> observalbe characteristics of the art. Everything else I feel falls >into >>> the personal feeling category, which is more telling of the observer >and >>> not the piece of art. >>> >>>> Paul Haslem >>>> dulcimer guy in Canada >>> >>> Kris >> >> >> > > >