Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland
Where in the Debating 4'33" Handbook is this rule?
|
It's common sense. If you're claiming that something is something, then you have to show that it is something.
Quote:
|
It's music because John Cage said that it was music
|
If that's the only qualification then the rest of this paragraph is pointless. If it isn't, then just saying something is music isn't enough and this statement is pointless. Unless of course just saying something is something is enough for it to be something in the art world, in which case art classifications are just an exercise in masturbation.
"It's music because I want people to think it's music."
Quote:
|
and it has the basic qualification of using sound (the sounds of the environment).
|
So ultimately, this is what we're dealing with. It's music because it intentionally uses sound? If so, "music" seems a thin enough concept that it shouldn't matter whether or not you call it music or just art. Seems like it would be more about prestige than any legitimate artistic statement.