Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › 4'33". Is it music?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

4'33". Is it music? - Page 5

post #61 of 69
2/7/10 at 8:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pltinum View Post
That's the problem with communication through internet and communication in general. Misunderstanding.
The subject of art stirs up a lot of opinion and even passion. Van Gogh and Gaugin would often literally come to blows over their discussions of art, what it is, what it means, what it should be, and so on.

Art is part of what defines us culturally, and even as a species. And a lot of people make their living doing art. So it's not really such a casual topic, imho -- it's a pretty serious topic. When someone states that certain things that have a lot of thought, history, theory, etc. behind them are not "art," I think they should be prepared to defend their position. No one has to take anything personally, but usually in the topic of art you can't just drop opinions like a bomb and then not expect anyone to challenge you on it. It kind of comes with the territory.

Saying, "it's just my opinion!" isn't really a defense against anything. Everything anyone says on a topic like "what is art?" is just their opinion - there's no need to specify it in any particular case. The question is what is that opinion founded on, and can you back it up with reasons, history, theory, example, etc. If not, then you're just "dropping bombs" and that should be taken into account when assessing if it's a legitimate position, or one that's maybe not as legit.
Reply
post #62 of 69
2/7/10 at 8:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarathustra19 View Post
I apologize if I add things that were not in my previous posts. I rarely think long term enough while posting to formulate an entire argument. Head-fi is not a term paper, after all. I'm not sure if what you first said there was directed specifically at me, but I want to assure you that I have seen/heard/felt the presence of 4'33'' in the past, in context (though surely not at the first performance) and I based my opinions on that experience. I also try to never base judgements on things I have not seen/heard/experienced.

Cheers and happy listening
No totally not specifically at you. I just hate it when people have a radical opinion about something, without even knowing or thinking what they are saying. To summerise and radicalise: narrow minded people, that don't really know what they're talking about. (happens alot in politics. Actually alot of people are narrow minded imo) It can of course happen once in a while when chit-chatting... no harm in that!

Well yeah! If you didn't like it, you didn't like it. I don't like it either! Although I do find the concept really intriguing. I guess I just love philosophy! That's what the piece is doing. That is almost the only thing it is doing.
Reply
post #63 of 69
2/7/10 at 8:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by userlander View Post
The subject of art stirs up a lot of opinion and even passion. Van Gogh and Gaugin would often literally come to blows over their discussions of art, what it is, what it means, what it should be, and so on.

Art is part of what defines us culturally, and even as a species. And a lot of people make their living doing art. So it's not really such a casual topic, imho -- it's a pretty serious topic. When someone states that certain things that have a lot of thought, history, theory, etc. behind them are not "art," I think they should be prepared to defend their position. No one has to take anything personally, but usually in the topic of art you can't just drop opinions like a bomb and then not expect anyone to challenge you on it. It kind of comes with the territory.

Saying, "it's just my opinion!" isn't really a defense against anything. Everything anyone says on a topic like "what is art?" is just their opinion - there's no need to specify it in any particular case. The question is what is that opinion founded on, and can you back it up with reasons, history, theory, example, etc. If not, then you're just "dropping bombs" and that should be taken into account when assessing if it's a legitimate position, or one that's maybe not as legit.
Yep! During my lessons of cultural streaming (philosophy of culture), I really noticed you just have opinions that aren't really coming from you, but someone who said it and you just parot it. So I think you really should know where your opinion is coming from. I totally agree with you! You actually can drop it like a bomb and say it's your opinion.. If your talking with friends etc.. but if you want to get somewhere, and not just talk against a wall, you have to back up your opinion and listen. If it all were just that simple of course!
Reply
post #64 of 69
2/8/10 at 4:42pm
Thread Starter 
"Aesthetics is for art what ornithology is for the birds" Danto. I don't agree with the quote but you could call Cage the former.
Reply
post #65 of 69
2/8/10 at 9:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingInABlueDream View Post
Really, 4'33" is more of a 'joke' if anything. You're suppose to wonder why nothing is playing, then come to the conclusion that everything around you is music. Artsy? Yes. Is it music? No.
I seem to remember one of my music Profs relating a performance he had seen of this piece. He went to great length to explain it, then pointed out that into the piece a bit, one of the other audience members behind him started giggling somewhat uncontrollably.

He turned and looked...it was Cage.

Point being I don't think it was meant to be taken too seriously. Perhaps just seriously enough that it might give one pause to evaluate the concept of "silence." Perhaps not.

"Performance Art" is probably a much more appropriate moniker. If it were up to me, I don't think I would program such a piece out of the context of other Modern/Avant Garde pieces. But, interestingly enough, it would still be a "Music" program.

I really do not understand why such a piece is ever recorded. It's raison d'etre has very much to do with the full context of a performance--the performer walking on stage, the sound (and even feeling) of the audience around you, etc.

Which creates the interesting quandary: you might not call it "music," but the only appropriate context to perform it is in a music concert.
Reply
post #66 of 69
2/9/10 at 12:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaubertuba View Post
Point being I don't think it was meant to be taken too seriously. Perhaps just seriously enough that it might give one pause to evaluate the concept of "silence." Perhaps not.
You just don't know if he was serious or not. But yes, it amuses me! That's why I like it. All the rest is just glazing on the cake. You can't have a piece with too much underlying message in it. Some of the avant-garde made something that couldn't possibly be art, but the public en-hailed it as art. Which may have been their intention. Critic on the public.
Reply
post #67 of 69
2/16/10 at 11:36am
For those that are still interested:

John cage talking about silence: YouTube - John Cage about silence
Reply
post #68 of 69
2/18/10 at 4:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by gbacic View Post
John Zorn > John Cage IMO

Cage made experimental music laughable and silly.
+1

He's the Andy Whorhol of music. To each his own.
Reply
post #69 of 69
2/18/10 at 5:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dimlyLit View Post
+1

He's the Andy Whorhol of music.
Marcel Duchamp surely?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › 4'33". Is it music?