Interesting that G.I. Gurdjieff, whom I realize few here know and fewer respect,
I ran into Gurdjieff by accident when I was 16, in a library. I persisted with the book, yet I suspect it was mostly over my head, but I think that seeds get planted. I should probably reread it.
Kevin wrote:Yes. A thought might not be easy to express in language, but it's not impossible.
That's true. But, sometimes, a thought isn't sharp enough to cut through an obstructive emotion or emotional state. Do you never ask yourself what in your expressed thoughts might resonate--harmonise, even--with certain emotional attitudes to them? Of course, this is where poetry can be used more pointedly than an instrumental---and, again, this has nothing to do with the ability to compose or structure (as Pye indicated) a piece of music.
Thus, there is a useful distinction between a composer and consumer psychology.
The perfection a composer tries to achieve is about more than just emotion.
Kevin Solway wrote:Imagine trying to convey an understanding of evolution by natural selection, or a scientific paper on chemistry, through music alone. It wouldn't be too easy.
Are you saying these are the highest types of information anyone could impart, and because music wouldn't be the best mode of communication for these, this is what makes music a second or third class medium?
The concept of evolution is a very high type of information, with deep philosophical scope.
Music is a bit like dope, in that it may be able to trigger some kind of insight, but the insight it provides is not usually very impressive, and it's just as likely to send you to sleep.
I think that music would be a good way to manipulate people, if that was the only way one could reach them.
Interesting that G.I. Gurdjieff, whom I realize few here know and fewer respect,
I ran into Gurdjieff by accident when I was 16, in a library. I persisted with the book, yet I suspect it was mostly over my head, but I think that seeds get planted. I should probably reread it.
You'll love him. You'll swoon like never before.
-
Haha. Of the hundreds of Gurdjieff students I encountered, I saw very few ever in swoon mode. It's not that type of material. But I see David still has a bone to pick, based on his particular predilections regarding the teaching.
Uncle Brokie writes: And, like music, entirely made up.
Cousin Trevor writes: What's the point of this sentence?
tomas interjects: Hey, Brokie makes sense in what he says...
Cousin Trevor then says: Even based on what you are replying to,
tomas surmises: With Kevin, all bets are off.
Cousin Trevor continues: I can't tell what you are trying to say.
tomas further states: That's because Uncle Brokie and The Soulman are in a tedious tug-o-war of words (see man behind curtain for details) on who gives in first.
But then, cousin Trevor claims: A mindful man needs few words.
brokenhead wrote:And, like music, entirely made up.
What's the point of this sentence? Even based on what you are replying to, I can't tell what you are trying to say.
Kevin seems to think that evolutionary theory which attributes the appearance and morphing of all species to be directly caused by the environment. This stance has no proof. It is entirely made up. He chose a bad example of science, as this is not science but unsubstantiated speculation. Experiments cannot be done to verify that the appearance of man was caused by the enviroment. It cannot be proven or disproven, really. It is not science. If you thought about it for a second, you see that this is true.
brokenhead: Okay, well that was one guess as to how you were inflecting the phrase. (You could have also been trying to say that everything is, technically speaking, made up.)
tom: Thanks for clearing that up. I'll just sit back and wait their war of attrition out.
I don't know if "music comes from the emotions", but I do think that good music is defined by how emotional it makes you. I have both played and listened to music detached and unemotionally, though it's never memorable when I do.
I don't know if it is how I'm wired or conditioned in particular, or if it's universal to the human race, that some combinations of sound induce more emotion than others. People like Louis Armstrong or Jerry Garcia have a certain "logic" to their solo structures, though I think the process isn't so much "reasoning" as becoming sensitive to the flashes of audio snippets in the musicians imagination and skillfully mimicking and translating them into a physical form.
These "flashes" might get more "advanced" as the musician progresses, but all this means is that he's learned which kinds of flashes cause more emotional stimulation.
Like every other addiction, the flashes that were once stimulating to the musician eventually get old, and unless he continues to practice rigorously to keep his skill sharp and evolving you either get a burned-out musician or an ex-musician.
Anyway, I'd agree that making or listening to music is the desire to generate emotions.
Kevin Solway wrote:The concept of evolution is a very high type of information, with deep philosophical scope.
Music is a bit like dope, in that it may be able to trigger some kind of insight, but the insight it provides is not usually very impressive, and it's just as likely to send you to sleep.
I think that music would be a good way to manipulate people, if that was the only way one could reach them.
Music with lyrics can be very impressive.
Music can be mental, physical, emotional, and meaningful.
