[AfterHours]

[RoundTheBend]

Good lord is it kind of anoying to keep a chain going here wihtout quoting all 65198495816519879 characters, so I'll reply like this... hope it doesn't get lost in meaning:

@ souplipton RE: Gesamtkunstwerk/limitations vs discipline
Interesting and well said. I'd have to agree with the idea that actually it isn't a limitation the artist places on themselves, rather discipline to an art form. I think there's a film about this concept where actually there are challenges to recreate "The Perfect Human" but with different disciplines or the word they used was Obstructions (really challenges)... but artistically, it kind of was remake this art under this discipline (I realize this is a stretch, but it is what came to mind and the film is well worth watching after watching The Perfect Human).

As to Gesamtkunstwerk, I've talked about that on this site before. I took a semester class fully dedicated to Der Ring des Nibelungen at university. It was quite possibly my favorite class I ever took - going into Poetic Edda/Norse Mythology, the music, opera, philosophy of art, etc. This is where I learned about how Kant (roughly 100 years earlier) made this arguement that not all art is equal. Poetry requires the highest level of cognitive process (in the form of rationalism, meaning the world around us is actually just in our mind... you have to create the meter in your mind to get the riding of a horse feeling while reading Erlkönig, etc.), whereas music is the most emotional art form, most of which requires the least amount of critical thinking (I'm not saying music can't be mentally complex or anything, rather the interpretation thereof requires the least amount of critical thinking - music itself (without lyrics) is mostly emotional in this arguement). So anyway, this idea of Gesamtkunstwerk is that ALL the levels of art (ranging from strictly emotional the most complex poetry [Wagner borrowed the complex aliteration from the Poetic Edda) into one big artistic endeavor. Thing is, all the art forms were to support the same artistic endeavor - it wasn't a total mess is what I mean, the music melded with the poetry, which melded with the stage design/visual arts.

In otherwords I agree with what you said... haha, but wanted to clarify.

RE: Monotony
Oh yes, any tool of the artist is interesting, but I was referring to listening to the monotony of listening to Free Bird EVERY DAMN DAY. I suppose you could do that to be ironic... and maybe that is artistic? hahaha - I once saw a quote from Father John Misty that his music sucks on purpose so that hipsters could ironically listen to crappy music, but for the art of it... hehehe, thought it was funny. Also life can be pretty damn monotonous (unless you just had a kid like me... not a dry moment). Sounds like an intersting film.

RE: Kant
This is how I see what Kant was saying:
A true artist is inspired by nature and NOT by books/science/schooling/the learned man (anti-empiricism). Therefore the uniqueness of true art is similar to the uniqueness of each human experience. An artist can use the form of drama over and over again and still be a true artist because the imitation isn't present just because of the form, rather each piece of good art has an inspired/non-scientific/non-book smart starting point. The artist didn't go look up the definition of how to make someone feel catharsis - they experienced it themselves. It's a reflection of human experience and you can't replicate/imitate true human experience. I mean you can, but then it is terrible art. So I think you mostly are on the same page (and I agree with your second part of what you were saying), but perhaps got caught up on the imitation side of things (at least that was my understanding of studying it while at university) - the focus was on the inspiration of knowledge/human experience and less on what you can learn from books (basically it was a fight between empricism and rationalism).

So here's some passages from Goethe's Sorrows of Young Werther to illustrate possibly what was going on with these thoughts:
"The count," he said, "is a man of the world, and a good man of
business: his style is good, and he writes with facility; but,
like other geniuses, he has no solid learning."

So like I mentioned before a true genius doesn't come by a scientific/methodical approach - it isn't learned with education.

Then here's a couple quotes about how Werther feels influenced to be a better drawer than he actually is, influenced by nature, the source of the genius/true aesthetic/art, etc. and NOT by the official techniques/learning of men of what art is... if that makes sense:

1. My drawings are the best things I have done since I
came here. The prince has a taste for the arts, and would improve
if his mind were not fettered by cold rules and mere technical
ideas. I often lose patience, when, with a glowing imagination,
I am giving expression to art and nature, he interferes with learned
suggestions, and uses at random the technical phraseology of artists.

2. I should be incapable of
drawing a single stroke at the present moment; and yet I feel that
I never was a greater artist than now. When, while the lovely valley
teems with vapour around me, and the meridian sun strikes the upper
surface of the impenetrable foliage of my trees, and but a few stray
gleams steal into the inner sanctuary, I throw myself down among the
tall grass by the trickling stream; and, as I lie close to the earth,
a thousand unknown plants are noticed by me: when I hear the buzz of
the little world among the stalks, and grow familiar with the countless
indescribable forms of the insects and flies, then I feel the presence
of the Almighty, who formed us in his own image, and the breath of
that universal love which bears and sustains us, as it floats around
us in an eternity of bliss; and then, my friend, when darkness overspreads
my eyes, and heaven and earth seem to dwell in my soul and absorb its
power, like the form of a beloved mistress, then I often think with
longing, Oh, would I could describe these conceptions, could impress
upon paper all that is living so full and warm within me, that it might
be the mirror of my soul, as my soul is the mirror of the infinite
God! O my friend -- but it is too much for my strength -- I sink
under the weight of the splendour of these visions!

Source: https://archive.org/stream/thesorrowsof...ywer11.txt

Of course this is their ideas - like you said we can reject them entirely (another philosophical concept I like from Hegel, which is my signature: Thesis (initial social norm/thought/hypothesis), Antithesis (counter to that), and Synthesis(somehow the truth is in the combination of both or a new thing that melds them together). (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesis)

Anyway, that's what I've learned on the subject - don't consider myself an expert in any regards. I think what they were after was to say the learned way was the imitation way (oversimplified, but I think that's the quickest way to say it).

[souplipton]

@sethmadsen

RE: Obstructions and "The Perfect Human"
I've seen the film, it's called The Five Obstructions, and it's with Lars Von Trier. I think it's an excellent example of what I am referring to with my talk about discipline. Another example I can think of as discipline is the use of the Oblique Strategies. Although both may seem like outside forces influencing the artist (and therefore be limitations), I would say otherwise, since the artist chooses to have these restrictions placed on them in order to challenge them.

RE: Kant
I focused in on imitation not because I thought it was the basis of his philosophy, but because it was the area where I thought I might present a challenge to his philosophy (in general I agreed with the rest as I understood it). Having read what you wrote, my understanding of his theory has changed slightly. To put my understanding of his theory most succinctly, making art can't be learned from it a book (you can't make art by following instructions), it has to come from genuine human experience. This theory is one I can completely agree with, and one for which my proposed challenge is moot.

RE: Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis
Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis seems to me to be the most concise account of the process of debate. People intellectually defend their opinions and keep an open enough mind to admit that they might, in part or in whole, be wrong, and change their opinion accordingly. To me, this process is, in its own way, beautiful.

[albumceleste]

1. When, for you personally, is it that art goes to far? When is it just garbage and when is it pushing boundaries? Does it ever? Is it likely a lack of understanding that causes distaste or are there art pieces that really are just garbage no matter how you look at it?

For my money, it goes "too far" when it goes full circle.
e.g. emplty canvas, 4'33'', readymades, a dog tied dying in an art gallery, etc etc etc

I don't know if I might be misquoting but I think Picasso once said that to break the rules first you must demonstrate you can do well according to them. Picasso could draw a pigeon in a trace because he wanted to, and be capable of paint Guernica. I can do the pigeon thing, but can't Guernica. I'm not an artist.

There's a light comedy movie about this if someone want to check it out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnyyDiMy-ts

2. What are your favorite challenging works and why are they worth getting to know? What makes them aesthetically pleasing?

Challenging art comes from the notion of art rules/limitations and their knowledge.
I don't know really, I like some stuff and dislike another not based on how challenging it is.
I do think, however, that a failed art piece that tries to innovate deserves credit for it, while a failed artpiece that goes through completely "safe" channels is just plain bad. I mean if you do a completely standard blues-rock album and you fail... well...

3. What do you think of the Parisian debut? What do you personally think about the music/ballet?

Would have been great to be there.
About the ballet: I've only seen 3 or 4 representations and always on film. Can't talk about any live experience of it and am not really knowleadged about ballet.
About the music: I think it's probably the best piece of music in the XXc.

4. Is challenging music for you the main course or is it an appetizer? In other words how often do you listen to challenging music and why?

I listen to a lot of "difficult" music -compared to people I know IRL- just because I like it. But I'm not thinking about it THAT way. I have friends that are just fine without moving away from rockism and it's ok; others just listen mostly to jazz and it's ok too. I think the listening experience is too personal.
I think being exposed to a lot of different things make your taste more "sophisticated". But then again my rocker friend who would never learn the difference between Schoenberg and Dukas can taste the difference in whisky blends just fine while for me it's all just whisky so there you have it.

5. This site constantly talks about music from 1950 onwards. How aware are we that classical music was alive and well in the 1960s? Why do you think this site kind of ignores that, but still represents Jazz from those time periods very well?

BEA is about albums -classical music fans think in terms of composed work, and secondary in terms of interpretation criteria. The recording is just a means to listen to the piece not an end-.
I don't think it represents jazz outside a couple big figures. Where are the jazz albums outside the golden era period?
BEA is its userbase and what they like. The charts give all the answers.

6. Was your first listen of this challenging or did you find it just as normal as anything else you listen to?

It took some listens to click in but were not forced. It hooked me.

7. Do you hear influences from this piece or John Adams' Shaker Loops on groups that are well represented on this site like Pink Floyd and Radiohead?

The chords mashup -that appilation process- is all over the XXc in some way or another. Not in all music of course.

8. Let's be honest, did you first hear this piece thanks to Fantasia?

Not but the thirsty dinosaurs come to mind at that particular point in the composition ever since watching the movie.

[RoundTheBend]

[RoundTheBend]

@albumceleste:

RE: Goes full circle
I completely agree with what you said, but something cool I learned about 4'33" is that it was supposed to have it's premiere out in the open - so it was the "symphony" of nature, if you will. Absolute quite actually wasn't the goal. I don't think you'll find recordings of 4'33" for this reason - it's about the experience of being aware of the sounds around you. Kind of cooler than absolute silence... but kind of a stretch nonetheless.

RE:
"I don't know if I might be misquoting but I think Picasso once said that to break the rules first you must demonstrate you can do well according to them."

Fantastic.


RE: I don't think it represents jazz outside a couple big figures.

Good point, there are more records other than the giants of jazz, but like other gems, you have to search for them.

RE: It took some listens to click in but were not forced. It hooked me.

Yeah, that's probably what I like most about this piece. It isn't your run of the mill music, yet so inviting and enticing.