From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Fri Feb 13 2004 - 17:29:49 GMT
In a message dated 2/13/04 4:51:02 PM GMT Standard Time, RycheWorld@aol.com
writes:
> People,
>
> All of this music discussion is boggling me. If there is "quality" among
> music then shouldn't that "quality" be determined by the individual? To say
> that Mozart had the "best" quality of music is opinion, right?
> Personally, I am drawn into the progressive rock and roll music
> (Queensryche, Pink Floyd, King's X...). I feel (sometimes literally!) their music
> (and they ARE "musicians") to be most hypnotic and enjoyable, to say the least.
> Yet, I find that Stomp is quite unique as well. Stomp is a bunch of people
> banging on trash cans, buckets, pipes, and whatever else they can find. They
> create rhythms and beats that are ... musical.
> So, my question is - Why is Mozart and Wagner "better" than anything
> else? Or am I missing the point? (Which is probably the case!)
> Also, once something is heard or listened to it no longer is dynamic but
> static. Where/How do you classify it then?
>
> Dan
>
Hello Dan,
I agree with you that Pink Floyd and banging on trash cans is Quality music
too.
I have often thought that if i ever find myself stranded on an island, one of
the first things i would do, after shelter and provision, is to carve a
bamboo flute and teach myself to play it. Know what i mean?
Your perception of music is important, and it is static. BUT! Be careful.
Listening to music is a Dynamic activity. When you listen to music, YOU dissipate
in the moment, and it is the moment we may wish to statically describe within
the MoQ framework as SQ-SQ tension/coherence. Such coherence is that point
when DQ is at work. See?
I wrote about the Mozart example because i discovered it two days ago and
wished to share my experience with others in the forum. I felt this example was
significant purely on the grounds of exceptional coherence in and across value
levels. Platt indicated that analysis may be harmful to our experience of
beauty, but neither Platt not I have the ability to experience music notation as
one purely versed in it. Some people, so i have observed, get a massive Quality
kick out of the abstract side of music. Who am i to argue with them? These
people operate on a level i do not have access to. (I apologise if for speaking
for Platt hear!)
Floyd is heavily influenced by Blues forms. I love the Blues and feel it to
be high quality music - you gotta live the blues to be transported by it?
But there is little doubt something quite special is going on in Mozart's
music - he appears to have had a wonderfully intuitive sense of measure,
proportion, harmony, balance, tension, coherence, beauty. It's like listening to water
in a stream; it is just so effortless, hovering like the butchers' knife;
teaching the way.
I am not the world's greatest Mozart fan - i am more your Bach kind of bloke
- but let's take a look at what is going on in excellent music, and i feel
recurring themes are tensions within a unified whole; and the whole is beyond
analysis, pointing to the way - Tao - Quality.
Where ever you find the way in music, that's ok. But evolution is moving
towards DQ, and that means greater coherence, and that will differentiate between
excellences in the vast repertoire of human musical creativity.
All the best,
Mark
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 13 2004 - 17:31:45 GMT