Music as Art

[lettsguitars]

of course music is art. goes without saying. artistic expression = art. art isn't just a visual medium! that would be silly! as for the use of equipment such as stereos mp3 players, well, music existed long before apple and itunes. i guess as originally passed down through generations, you could call it folk art in that sense. but art nonetheless. hence a&r (artist and repertoire). i consider myself an artist, however the jury is out on that one!

[Tech]

[url="http://www.ted.com/talks/charles_limb_your_brain_on_improv.html"]http://www.ted.com/talks/charles_limb_your..._on_improv.html[/url]

that's a great talk on some ideas about what's actually going on in the brain when creativity is happening. obviously a huge topic and the amazing thing about the brain is the more we study it the more complicated it gets.. some years back when the optical lobe was identified, it would appear to serve a simple enough function - processing sight. as it goes it tends to be active in all sorts of activities, as demonstrated in the video (and in lectures we've been given a few more examples).

creativity to me is finding the ghost in the machine, although of course it means something different to everyone.

as for what art is - it is definitely very difficult if not impossible to define as mentioned earlier in the thread. although I think the common factor for art is expression.

[Kiwi]

[quote name='Tech' post='1086340' date='Jan 12 2011, 05:00 AM']I think the common factor for art is expression.[/quote]
I'd go with that.

[Mykesbass]

No, it is a mixture of science and religion!

"Pythagoras was the first documented scholar to establish the notion of musical ratios, believing that music could be represented as pure mathematical ratios, which he believed were the ratios of the cosmos.

The Renaissance recycled his ideas, where architects, artists, and craftsmen used these musical ratios in the built environment because they believed that, as twentieth century architecture historian Rudolf Wittkower maintains, “as man is the image of God and the proportions of his body are produced by divine will, so the proportions in architecture have to embrace and express the cosmic order, citing ideas of Pythagoras and Plato's mathematical cosmos”.

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='Tech' post='1086340' date='Jan 12 2011, 05:00 AM']... I think the common factor for art is expression.[/quote]
Expression of what?

Does that lead to asking 'what is expression?' instead of 'what is art?'?

Anyway, theory number 7:

7: [u]The Expressive Theory[/u]: art communicates something, usually feelings or emotions. Leo Tolstoy said: 'To evoke in oneself a feeling one has once experienced and having evoked it once in oneself then by means of movements, lines, colours, sounds, or forms expressed in words, so to transmit this feeling that others experience the same feeling - this is the activity of art.'

[Bassassin]

[quote name='Mykesbass' post='1086402' date='Jan 12 2011, 08:56 AM']No, it is a mixture of science and religion!

"Pythagoras was the first documented scholar to establish the notion of musical ratios, believing that music could be represented as pure mathematical ratios, which he believed were the ratios of the cosmos.

The Renaissance recycled his ideas, where architects, artists, and craftsmen used these musical ratios in the built environment because they believed that, as twentieth century architecture historian Rudolf Wittkower maintains, “as man is the image of God and the proportions of his body are produced by divine will, so the proportions in architecture have to embrace and express the cosmic order, citing ideas of Pythagoras and Plato's mathematical cosmos”.[/quote]
So, if one finds oneself unable to accept the possibility of the existence of storybook skyfaries, by definition one cannot be an artist?

J.

[essexbasscat]

[quote name='Bassassin' post='1086504' date='Jan 12 2011, 11:02 AM']So, if one finds oneself unable to accept the possibility of the existence of storybook skyfaries, by definition one cannot be an artist?

J.[/quote]


Close, but not quite.

There is the Golden, or divine ratio that is 1. 61803, known as Phi, pronounced Fai or Fi. The ratios of lengths of sections of the human body conform to this ratio, as do many features of nature. For this reason, it's known as the divine ratio. It's also found in ancient architecture.

Music is also contructed of mathematical ratios as Pythagorus discovered. If Time signitures are considered as mathematical ratios, you can have lots of fun wandering off in a different time signiture to everyone else and arrive back in perfect time at a future point in a musical piece i.e if everyone else is doing three bars of four you can do four bars of threes to arrive back at the same count of 12.

Tech - that post of Charles Limb's presentation was fascinating, a real thank you for that one. Keith Jarrett's piano playing is awe inspiring, I've got to see more of that artist. I wonder if different creative areas of the brain are activated when painting as compared to the areas activated when creating Jazz ? Lots of food for thought there.

Essential tension, thank you for taking the time to outline those description / definitions of Art. Looking at your post and CrazyWiki's, it's clear that this topic has been explored extensively for a very long time.
Is this subject as sub - section of formal Art academic studies such as those found with Art degrees for instance ?

Mykesbass, interesting contribution.

Thanks for all your answers folks There are obviously some very knowledgable people around here

T

Edited January 12, 2011 by essexbasscat

[BassMunkee]

It is entirely possible to disappear entirely up one's own arse in any discussion like this.
at a baseline level music is no less art than painting or ballet or acting.
You can bring out as many theories as you like but it boils down to what you as an individual think and feel about it.
Is what Girls Aloud do as valid in artistic terms as, say, Stockhausen? On a fundamental level yes, but subjectively? No - in my opinion.
But that's only my opinion.

[Skol303]

[quote name='BassMunkee' post='1086714' date='Jan 12 2011, 02:02 PM']It is entirely possible to disappear entirely up one's own arse in any discussion like this.[/quote]

^ Spot on!

In answer to the question: yes, music is art. Hence people who make music are commonly referred to as 'artists' (my job title is "Creative Director" so this kinda bo11ock5 discussion is part of my day job...!).

Does that mean musicians and, for example, painters think the same? Probably... there's science to show that people use certain parts of their brain when thinking creatively - be it writing a poem, playing music, painting a picture, whatever - the same areas of the brain light up when doing any of these activities. Obviously it's (currently) impossible to know for certain, but I'd hazard a guess that all artists use similar parts of their brain when being artistic - so for example, a painter might think about colours, hues and composition in the same way that a musician might think about keys, tones and... well, composition! (again the same term is used in both fields of art).

Short answer: yes!

[LukeFRC]

[quote name='Skol303' post='1086766' date='Jan 12 2011, 02:53 PM']^ Spot on!

In answer to the question: yes, music is art. Hence people who make music are commonly referred to as 'artists' (my job title is "Creative Director" so this kinda bo11ock5 discussion is part of my day job...!).

Does that mean musicians and, for example, painters think the same? Probably... there's science to show that people use certain parts of their brain when thinking creatively - be it writing a poem, playing music, painting a picture, whatever - the same areas of the brain light up when doing any of these activities. Obviously it's (currently) impossible to know for certain, but I'd hazard a guess that all artists use similar parts of their brain when being artistic - so for example, a painter might think about colours, hues and composition in the same way that a musician might think about keys, tones and... well, composition! (again the same term is used in both fields of art).

Short answer: yes! [/quote]


music is one of the arts, yes the greeks put it in there.
is it a Art in the way we understand contempory Art- in some cases yes, in most no.
is music creative or expressive- yes it can be.

i fear a discussion on what art 'is' will get us no where, I studied sculpture for 4 years and that question and the lack of answers are that starts of whole artistic practices.
do musicians and painters think the same.... no not at all in my experience. but then I'm not a very good musician i imagine in some forms of music i could be (jazz being the obvious example) but I would need lots of practice and a complete command of music to be able to then play with the fabric of what music is.
If i had that though I would be writing orchestral scores... not playing a 4 string fender bass.....

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='BassMunkee' post='1086714' date='Jan 12 2011, 02:02 PM']... You can bring out as many theories as you like but [b]it boils down to what you as an individual think and feel about it.[/b] ...[/quote]
That seems to be merely another theory.

[Skol303]

[quote name='LukeFRC' post='1086781' date='Jan 12 2011, 03:10 PM']If i had that though I would be writing orchestral scores... not playing a 4 string fender bass.....[/quote]

^ Ha! Made me laugh; good point too...

I don't think it's so much a case that being a good artist will help you to be a good musician. More that artists and musicians use the same parts of their brain when thinking creatively.

Just like plumbers and computer programmers use the same parts of their brain to do their respective jobs (i.e. logic / problem solving). But that doesn't mean I'd hire a computer programmer to fit a washing machine... ;-)

[Bilbo]

Seems to me a matter of perception.

If something is Art, it can also be entertaining. It can be good art and bad entertainment, or bad Art and good entertainment. At best, it is good Art and good entertainment. It can communicate successfully to one person or to millions. It can have a utilitarian purpose (e.g. pottery) or not (e.g. origami?). If it has a commercial purpose, it may still be Art or it may not. In art college terms, is it Graphic Art or Fine Art? One is craft whilst the other Art. Both are creative. An artwork can be Fine Art but, if used as a chocolate box lid, becomes something else. Music is no different. Some music is Art (say Bjork, Evan Parker, Stravinsky, Coltrane) some arguably isn't (say Stock, Aitken and Waterman). Some is probably both (Kate Bush? Talking Heads? King Crimson? Kenny Wheeler?). Either way, its not my decision. At best, it is about consensus - if more than one person thinks its Art, then it must be. Or not. Who said a pile of bricks is Art? I suspect it was a minority view. What about action Art? Performance Art? Good Art or bad? It has to be subjective (and culturally defined?).

Whenever someone tries to draw a circle around what defines Art, someone else will step onto the line and over it.

Is music Art? Some of it is.

[Jerry_B]

I'm an artist, so I thought I'd wade in here and see if I can help. The problem is, I can't Despite alot of theorising, absolute definitions are lacking - especially as definitions of art are mutable and changing. What's considered to be art now would not necessarily have had the same title applied to it 100 years ago. That said, the least that can be said of it is that it is a creative process, and in that sense in includes a wide variety of human endeavours. It's just that human beings stratify those process into different values and the perception of these changes over time. This isn't just the case with 'high' art - it applies to music, design, and various other disciplines. Certain sections of society have the power to make definitions, but it's up to the rest of society as to whether they also apply those rules. Alot of the time it does boil down to apparent worth in terms of the response it creates in the percipient, but even that's open to interpretation.

[Skol303]

"Music is an art form whose medium is sound."

^ Wikipedia definition... so it must be true, right?? ;-)

[lojo]

I know from experience that qualified art professionals will a call a statue "craft" and not "art" if its 3d and to scale and is beyond something they can personally pull off, regardless if it sold for a good fee and got displayed for the public


Surely creating music is an art form, regardless if its complex or simple, made for pleasure or profit, or even if you like it of not

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='Skol303' post='1086861' date='Jan 12 2011, 04:15 PM']"Music is an art form whose medium is sound."

^ Wikipedia definition... so it must be true, right?? ;-)[/quote]
That's it for John Cage's [i]4' 33"[/i] then.

Or we could try 'Music is an art form whose medium is sound and silence'.

[Skol303]

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='1086898' date='Jan 12 2011, 04:42 PM']That's it for John Cage's [i]4' 33"[/i] then.[/quote]

^ Brilliant!

I won't pretend to have known about that piece before Googling it just now... but made me laugh when I found out.

Technically speaking there is still some sound involved in that composition (i.e. background noise), but... ah b*****ks to it! ;-)

Art or arse? THAT is the question...

[Kiwi]

John Cage is one of a number of creatives who have challenged the thinking behind art. Marcel Duchamp's infamous toilet installation kind of started the ball rolling.

Some might argue that the definition of art is all about exploring what the definition of art is...which is self justifying and circular, but paradoxes themselves often hide a truth.

Advertising guru Tony Kaye took a dump in an LA art gallery (with the gallery staff's permission) once and claimed it was art. The message was 'art is sh*t'.

[risingson]

Speaking of art that represents a paradoxical ideal, here is my favourite, entitled 'The treachery of Images'.

[url="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_DbpqRnKDw4s/S8LdYHrv0TI/AAAAAAAAAnE/KfXa5p3dPxI/s1600/pipe.jpg"]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_DbpqRnKDw4s/S8Ld.../s1600/pipe.jpg[/url]

The tag in the picture translates as 'This is not a pipe'.

Edited January 13, 2011 by risingson

[essexbasscat]

Do painters and musicians use the same parts of the brain for the creative process ? I'd like to see some MRI evidence to help decide about that one. The creative area of the brain is processing visual information for painting and auditory information for music.

While both are potentially creative, the painter can take as much time as he likes to carefully construct his piece, while the musician is often working to an unforgiving time signiture in a live situation. If composing music, then of course, the composer can take as much time as they like, as with the painter.

It's the differences of sensory medium that make this an interesting subject for me. A good friend of mine (now out of the country) is a hobbyist painter. While many similar things inspire painters and musicians, they often respond in very different ways. How much of that is down to differences of craft or personal differences is, I suppose, open to much discussion. But the handling of the creative process has fascinated me for ages. I do wonder if my songwriting would improve if I understood the creative process to a greater depth.

Just a thought.

T

[Jerry_B]

That may vary from person to person. Any time I create artwork or music, I tend to 'see' it in my mind's eye as a structure or pattern - if that makes sense! As I learn by ear, I also tend to 'see' what I'm learning as patterns. If I can't figure that out in a song the bass line doesn't sit in my mind until I figure out the pattern of it.

[Kiwi]

[quote name='essexbasscat' post='1087651' date='Jan 13 2011, 11:06 AM']Do painters and musicians use the same parts of the brain for the creative process ?

Just a thought.

T[/quote]
Depends on the creative process, I think.

[BassMunkee]

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='1086802' date='Jan 12 2011, 03:33 PM']That seems to be merely another theory.[/quote]
err... no...?

[Spoombung]

[quote name='essexbasscat' post='1086088' date='Jan 11 2011, 09:09 PM']Hi all

what philosphies does music share with painting and sculpting etc ?[/quote]

It shares the gallery in common with the case of an installation featuring sound. I've seen a lot of music/art crossover things. The defining factor always seems to be context (the gallery). And that's the answer to your question!