Klarinet Archive - Posting 000016.txt from 2001/04

From: Bilwright@-----.net (William Wright)
Subj: [kl] Meta-music?
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 13:50:52 -0400

Our recent discussions about good vs bad music (or performers
thereof) make a point about the language that we use to discuss music.

We've all heard the paradox: "This sentence is a lie." If this
sentence _is_ a lie, then the sentence is declaring itself to be true
and therefore it _isn't_ a lie....

The resolution is that a language cannot logically describe its own
rules. Statements that describe a language's rules obey a separate
language of their own (sometimes called a meta-language) even if the
dictionaries for both languages happen include identical printed or
acoustic patterns as symbols (words).

We should recognize a similar paradox when we use a musical rule to
describe music. "Good musical skills" can "sound awful", and vice
versa and inversely and conversely and so forth. I think that some of
this paradox has crept into our discussion of Stoltzman's music.
Having command of the "rules and techniques" may or may not mean that
you enjoy the content of his music. When you try to transfer from a
"rule" to the "content" (from meta-language to language), you can end up
with uncomfortable arguments and/or statements.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org