pc issue of the day pt. 4:33 isn't music

DwnWthVwls · 07-06-2015, 04:23 PM

Yeh, but I asked if you consider it music since that's essentially what 433 is.. I don't know if I would always consider field recordings music.

Two people go out with systems, stand side by side, and start/stop recording at the very same time. One says it's music the other one says it isn't. Who's right? What about the 'intention behind the music' point you keep going back to?

**Frownland** · 07-06-2015, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls

Yeh, but I asked if you consider it music. I understand it's a field recording, but I don't know if I would always consider field recordings music.

That depends on what the artist who recorded it wanted it to be, but I've largely only heard of field recordings as being done for music so I would say yes. If it was someone making sound effects for a film, maybe I would say no. Then again, the person who was doing that came along and said that it was music then I would concede because it's not up to me to decide what music is or isn't.

DwnWthVwls · 07-06-2015, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

That depends on what the artist who recorded it wanted it to be, but I've largely only heard of field recordings as being done for music so I would say yes. If it was someone making sound effects for a film, maybe I would say no. Then again, the person who was doing that came along and said that it was music then I would concede because it's not up to me to decide what music is or isn't.

The Batlord · 07-06-2015, 04:40 PM

And about this...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

Then again, the person who was doing that came along and said that it was music then I would concede because it's not up to me to decide what music is or isn't.

Why not? I'm allowed my own interpretation of art in general, why shouldn't I be able to also interpret what kind of art it is?

**Frownland** · 07-06-2015, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

Why not? I'm allowed my own interpretation of art in general, why shouldn't I be able to also interpret what kind of art it is?

Because it's not up to the listener to decide what the piece is. You're free to your own interpretation, but if you go around saying that Jaws is a film about aliens and Spielberg comes and shuts you down on it, your interpretation is wrong. You can still hold onto that interpretation, but since you didn't create it, it's not your place to say, especially after being told otherwise.

The Batlord · 07-06-2015, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

Because it's not up to the listener to decide what the piece is. You're free to your own interpretation, but if you go around saying that Jaws is a film about aliens and Spielberg comes and shuts you down on it, your interpretation is wrong. You can still hold onto that interpretation, but since you didn't create it, it's not your place to say, especially after being told otherwise.

But if Spielberg believed that he had been abducted by aliens, and subconsciously made Jaws into an expression of his trauma at the hands of the aliens, then even if he told me I was wrong, that wouldn't mean I necessarily was.

Likewise, if John Cage wants 4'33 to be interpreted as music, but I find that his reasoning doesn't add up, then shouldn't I also be able to contradict him?

**Frownland** · 07-06-2015, 05:06 PM

^Since when is art based in facts and logic?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

But if Spielberg believed that he had been abducted by aliens, and subconsciously made Jaws into an expression of his trauma at the hands of the aliens, then even if he told me I was wrong, that wouldn't mean I necessarily was.

Likewise, if John Cage wants 4'33 to be interpreted as music, but I find that his reasoning doesn't add up, then shouldn't I also be able to contradict him?

You could contradict him, but his opinion would still outweigh yours.

The Batlord · 07-06-2015, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

You could contradict him, but his opinion would still outweigh yours.

Would my opinion outweigh Spielburg's anally probed one? I should think so, since my interpretation would more accurately reflect his work than his own.

If I can potentially interpret a piece of art more accurately than the artist themselves, then your entire notion of not being able to contradict an artist is invalid. Ergo, if I want to tell John Cage that his music isn't music, then I'm not automatically wrong.

~~John Wilkes Booth~~ · 07-06-2015, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

^Since when is art based in facts and logic?

so wait. what did you use to argue that 4'33 is music?

i think our friend frownland here is stuck in the matrix, guys

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode