Re: art not music


Subject: Re: art not music
From: Eliot Handelman (eliot@generation.net)
Date: Sat Feb 26 2005 - 18:01:10 EST


n_kondon@alcor.concordia.ca wrote:

>Quoting Eliot Handelman <eliot@generation.net>:
>
>
>
>
>>The issue seems to be this. Some aspect of ea is non-music. If it's not
>>music then it should at least be art. Or this is how I'm reading this.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>In my view calling EA "art" doesn't help or change anything. The
>>missing component is the tactical force
>>
>>

(add: that we find in music, but also in the other arts)

>>-- the feeling of what will happen if I listen to this music.
>>
or see a movie, etc.

>>Will it
>>cheer me up, expose my chaos, or
>>illuminate something in the universe of man in the way that Bruckner or
>>Nielsen seem to?
>>
>>
>
>I am attempting to distinguish EA from music, but in the above paragraph you
>categorize EA as a type of music.
>
I was speaking of music, not ea -- that there's a certain promise we
feel in listening to music that I
called "the tactical force." I feel there should be such a force operant
in EA as well -- there
usually isn't and the listening experience for me is often about waiting
out the piece. I was trying to
suggest that this force is always non-musical but that we also find it
in music. And I think this is more important
than providing a set of attributes that distinguish something from music
as "art."

-- eliot
 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:06 EST