In Reply to: Examples of "your limits" for "music"... posted by SE on October 27, 2006 at 04:36:16:
SE,I think the world of art was changed forever when c. 1913 Marcel Duchamp pointed at ordinary objects- like a urinal- and by signing them and calling them "art"- there was an artistic intention and context- and so really everything with an intention can be art.
With music, the definition is even broader, a sound that is intended as communication and/or an aesthetic object can be called music. I was reminded of this broader definition when last evening while waiting for a friend to begin a hike, I was listening to a bird singing- it had rhythm, pitch, repetitive patterns, and as it's in nature- must have a purpose- an intention, and therefore is as much music as Mozart.
Until I was at university I listened mostly to the usual Classical composers, but my taste keeps getting wider chronologically and I find music like Cage's 1946 gamelon-like "Sonatas and Interludes for prepared Piano" now conventional- easy and accesssible. I luxuriate in the haunting shape and detail of Messien and Ligeti, I revel in Paert and Adams. Then, I'll listen to Dowland, Mahler, and Machaut refreshed.
I suppose in the end, I really don't have a limit on what I'll listen to in terms of advanced concepts, but of course as always there's good and bad music of any tradition and era.
Cheers,
Bambi B
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- I'm a Duchampian - Bambi B 11:46:43 10/28/06 (4)
- Bambi... - EBerlin 08:59:19 10/29/06 (2)
- Re: Bambi/EBerlin ? - Abel McCain 18:44:05 10/29/06 (1)
- re: Whatever - EBerlin 19:14:15 10/29/06 (0)
- Is that fresh air I'm smelling? Thanks for it! n/t - SE 12:26:51 10/28/06 (0)