I understood what he was saying. He was using visual art as a metaphor for how 4'33 was music. It wasn't that complicated.

And JWB does bring up a good point. If you had no idea what 4'33 was, and just stumbled upon a recording of it, with no orchestra to observe, you would never understand that it was supposed to be music and not just a blank tape. If you have to be told that it's music...

It's performance art.

So, the people with the different opinions, then. Gotcha. Cause that's what art is all about. Agreement.

I don't like to explain jokes. Rather than explaining it, I'll take the dead air. Four minutes and thirty three seconds of dead air. http://assets.forexfactory.net/image...aight_face.gif

I don't disagree with some people not being aware that it was a song in itself without knowing it, but the intention as music is what makes it music, and nothing else.

People with opposing opinions is one thing, people simply reiterating "no it isn't" in response to people who actually backed up their claims ad nauseam is another.

Ugh you guys it does have artistic commentary on many levels. I think he was partially trying to show the power and remind us of the validity of silence and space in music. It's about showing us the extreme of that. It's also about the nuance that classical composers and musicians often talk about, except it's not about the nuance in their instruments, but in the world around them. Everyone gets annoyed when they hear outside noises interrupting the music but what if every little annoyance is what you were meant to focus on, and what if you can allow that to interfere with the music in a way that you welcome?

Music is defined as sound in time. Obviously it doesn't take any compositional or musical talent to come up with 4'33, but even if it isn't being audibly displayed, there is rhythm, and the sound is supposed to be every little nuance around you. It's more of a tongue in cheek reminder that silence and space are important aspects of music in a society that jams its music full of every possible and that the nuance around you can bolster your musical experience instead of detracting from it.

If that was a joke, it was a terrible one, as I also thought you were being serious.

.

No I have nothing against argument, I have something against people using the same argument over and over again because they refuse to see the other side of the coin.

Thank you.

Then why not do away with the term "music" altogether and just call it art if there's no qualification other than that the composer calls it music. You can say the same thing about art, and music is art, so just take out the middle man and call it art.