[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [microsound] Lemur!



I see your point too, although I still can't reconcile some kind of
false limitation being put on ease of attaining the outcome. I think the
way to address the risk of meaningless from saturation is to listen
carefully.

 Noel Peters


-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Ponto [mailto:kevin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, 11 February 2005 1:40 PM
To: microsound
Subject: Re: [microsound] Lemur!

I see your point. Though, in many cases, it entirely true that a 
difficult process does indeed add to art, as with anything. Nobody 
give's a hoot if you climb your stairs, but climb Mt. Everest and 
you'll get press, just as playing Beethoven on the kazoo (kitsch factor 
aside) is no match for Beethoven on piano. Though I disagree with the 
school that subscribes to process over product (as many modern 
electronic pieces seem to do eagerly), I think the more difficult 
something is, the more impressive it's achievement. All of this is only 
valid within reason, of course. Suggesting that we try to make the 
instruments as difficult as possible is nonsense as you stated. The 
goal is not to eliminate the possibility of art entirely, or to all but 
a handful of people on the planet. The goal, I think, is to reach a 
balance of difficulty with possibility so as to not render art 
impossible, but not render it so possible that it becomes meaningless 
through saturation.

kp


On Feb 10, 2005, at 5:57 PM, Noel Peters wrote:

>> So is art reduced to craft when skilled manual use of tools are
>> involved? If that's the case, then there's a lot less art and a lot
>> more craft out there than I thought. Since the sound is the art, how
> is
>> the person directly creating the sound not an artist? See below for
>> some elaboration on this.
>
>
> There might be a lot more craft than art about depending on your
taste.
> :)
>
> The person is the artist but the process of creating the art does not
> have any intrinsic aesthetic content. That is, the difficulty of the
> instrument is an absurd criteria on which to base aesthetic value. 
> Taken
> to its logical extreme, we would then be forced to conclude that the
> harder an instrument is to master the better is the art. Therefore in
> order to make the best art we should make the instruments as primitive
> and difficult as possible. Which is nonsense. And therefore ascribing
> technique to the realm of aesthetics is also nonsense. :)
>
>
>  Noel Peters
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org


_____________________________________________________________________ 
This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by MCI's Internet Managed 
Scanning Services - powered by MessageLabs. For further information 
visit http://www.mci.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org