Re: [LAU] re Subconscious Affecting Music

From: David Santamauro <david.santamauro@email-addr-hidden>
Date: Wed Sep 01 2010 - 16:04:10 EEST

On Wed, 1 Sep 2010 16:36:01 +0400
Louigi Verona <louigi.verona@email-addr-hidden> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 4:26 PM, David Santamauro
> <david.santamauro@email-addr-hidden
> > wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 1 Sep 2010 16:15:53 +0400
> > Louigi Verona <louigi.verona@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 3:49 PM, David Santamauro
> > > <david.santamauro@email-addr-hidden
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 1 Sep 2010 12:21:27 +0400
> > > > Louigi Verona <louigi.verona@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > don't. But commercial art is not art and those products are
> > > > > not worth anybody's attention. Even the best of them.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Really?
> > > >
> > > > So any commissioned work by the great masters throughout the
> > > > ages is not worth attention? I beg to differ.
> > > >
> > > > David
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Why do you rephrase me? I did not say anything about commissioned
> > > works by great masters.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > fair enough. My point is simply that such a broad stroke as
> > "commercial art is not art" is just your opinion (which you are
> > entitled) but clearly there are many magnificent works that have
> > been created for the masses in search of fame and fortune that are
> > worthy of attention.
> >
> > Most great composers were/are performers that needed to display
> > their virtuosity in order to "break into the scene", Bach, Mozart
> > and Beethoven being no exceptions.
> >
> > Are we to write off these works and pay them no attention?
> >
> > David
> >
> >
>
> Let's say it was broad just to make a point. Also it is exceedingly
> difficult to briefly explain why I do not believe Bach to search for
> fame or money with music. I seriously, silly me, believe that music
> to him was something else than means to make money or break into the
> scene.

Bach wasn't exactly striving for fame, but he was surely trying to
impress in order to secure a position that would allow him to provide
for a family doing what he loved to do.

The mentality changed through the course of the 18th century moving
away from simply court-appointed "secure positions" to self-supporting
composers accepting commissions and, yes, in order to get more
commissions, these composers strove for fame -- there is much
literature on the subject and although I've been schooled many years in
music history, theory and composition, there are many others who can
explain this change better than I. But it is this change that was
pivotal.

> But today a lot of people cannot imagine this kind of a
> mindset and today it is perfectly normal to think that art for art's
> sake is perfection which is unrealistic and which will make musician
> "starve".

True, but isn't what I mentioned above still something that
artists strive for? ("trying to impress in order to secure a position
that would allow him to provide for a family doing what he loved to
do"). Granted, this is a simplistic view, but a starving artist will
die of starvation. An artist that makes enough money will continue to
create -- a fact of life traceable to the ideas of Darwin, I'm afraid.

> Today society and mindsets of people are very different. To
> get a feel of what I mean you can compare the atmosphere of a
> commercial company and the atmosphere of a scientific institute.
> Although, come to think of it, a lot of western universities are very
> much applied money making science nowadays.

So maybe the commercial company wants fortune, but the academics surely
want fame ... which, of course, translates to money as the more famous
a university is, the more students want to attend, the more government
grants for research it will receive, usw.

>
> Yeah, it is just how I see it. I am not saying it is degradation
> necessarily, but I do believe that there is certain lacking of
> sincerity and non-financial motivation in professional fields in
> general, which makes a lot of really talented people stay in amateur
> scenes.

Again, if the amateur scene is providing enough to allow the artist to
continue creating, I see nothing wrong with it.

David

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Wed Sep 1 16:15:05 2010

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Sep 01 2010 - 16:15:05 EEST