Klarinet Archive - Posting 000443.txt from 2003/02

From: "Andy Raibeck" <cactus@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Debate topic......
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 01:21:25 -0500

> Quoted -from "Music and the Mind", Anthony Storr, Chapter 3:

> Music is a temporal art. Its patterns exist in time and require
> duration for their development and completion. Although painting and
> architecture and sculpture make statements about relationships between
> space, objects and colours, these relationships are static.

That depends on how you define these "relationships":

a) If these are the physical aspects, as presented by the artist, then yes,
the statement can be said to be true (nothwithstanding the physical wear on
those materials over the passage of time).

b) The relationships with respect to the eye of the beholder are not
necessarily static, as one person may view the same work differently than
another; or the same person may view a work in different ways, depending on
mood and other factors.

> Music
> more aptly represents human emotional processes because music, like
> life, appears to be in constant motion.

Not necessarily true In the same fashion as (a) above, the music as written
down by the composer is analogous to the physical aspects as presented by a
sculptor, painter, or architect. Likewise, as in (b) above, the
relationships between the different sounds are not static from the
perspective of the performer and/or listener.

In short, I don't think the quote makes its point.

> [the paragraph's final sentence, which I have omitted until I read
> further in the book: "The fact the musical movement is more apparent
> than real will be discussed later."]

Not sure I understand what that latter sentence means, so I can't be certain
that it is relevant.

Regards,

Andy

---------------------------------------------------------------------