Other web Sites
Harmonica Blues  Harmonica Amps
Harmonica Links Harmonica Pages
• Archives Home
• Years
 · 1992
 · 1993
 · 1994
 · 1995
 · 1996
 · 1997 		 · 1998
 · 1999
 · 2000
 · 2001
 · 2002
 · 2003
 
Web HarpL
Ebay Searches:
Amps:
Microphones:
Effects:
Harmonicas and Gear:
Harmonica Music and Instruction:

 

 

Harp-L Archives

[Previous Message] [Next Message]
[Next in Thread]
[Start of Thread] [End of Thread]

From: Snaru~ol.com
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 17:25:49 EDT
Subject: Art, artists & audiences

Hello artists (anybody there?),

since our agent provocateur in office is now offlist, we've seemingly have a
successor.

Mike, now living in Kingwood, TX, wondered about a respecting remarking
by the list administration, who that agent could has been (or: had been?
Can't care for that).

Well Barry, in case, you have intentionally formulated this notorius
sentence, I noticed an absolute bull's-eye (of course, you don't). You
provoked so many ideas that I easily could fill 10 pages if reflecting them
all. No fears, I won't.

Though I'm aware of your idea behind (Dave found some understanding,
though he basically disagreed), such steep formulations without further
comment are rather confusing than expressive.

OTOH, they usually cause all kinds of exotic formulations (see Doug's
"musical masturbation" etc.), otherwise, never heard.

If we are talking whether an audience is the prerequisite that certain
acoustic phenomena can be called "music", then also about the question
whether certain art movements are to be considered art at all.

In quoting your > "Art is nothing without an audience"`< or > "I'd go so far
as to not call it music until its heard by someone else"< I recall the
situation in Germany some 6 decades ago.

Please, don't misunderstand my following parallel, I only aim at the
qualitative aspect.

Regarding certain styles in painting (impressionism, expressionism,
dadaism cubism) the nazis declared them to be so-called "entartete
Kunst" (= degenerated art). Consequently, they removed these paintings
from the museums and persecuted the artists.

See, you are even one step ahead of the nazis, pssssst. The nazis at
least called these paintings art, though "degenerated". However, you
questioned the "music in the closet" to be "music" at all.

If not "music", then, what else? Noises? Here, you even would be in line
with the nazis; they didn't consider "jazz" to be "music".

Well, Barry, don't read this as seriously as it might look. But you gave
the penny, I take the pound.

Let's do a little mind trick, I'm a fan of. Here's a wellknown "salto
logicale":

1. All birds lay eggs. 2. No doubt too, all crocodiles lay eggs. 3. Therefore,
a crocodile has to be a bird.

This so-called "syllogism" can be modified like a CX 12. Taken reversely,
we then get this somewhat complicated result:

1. All music instruments played in performance make music and the
artist is named a musician. 2. If played in the closet, a person makes
noises with an object that looks like a music instrument.

Barry, that's exactly what you said. Now, let's apply this to you:

Barry has lots of objects looking like music instruments, however,
everytime, Barry is ......... orrrps, forgot how to complete.

Some last remarkings to the artist and his audience.

Going back to the beginning of human art "activities", we may be visitors
of the famous stone paintings in the vaults of Lascault in southern France.
These paintings the experts consider doubtless to be art in the modern
sense. However, they can't be exhibited in a museum to be admired by an
audience. No art, simple wall smearing?

Or let's take a philharmonica orchestra "performing" its final dress
rehearsal in the morning for the Beethoven concert in the evening in front
of a gala audience. In the morning the "musicians" imagined to ......
oh, that's too phantastic....

Barry, I appologize in advance, in case, you see no reason for a smiley.

Siegfried