I see Vic, this "Holy Ghost" thing hit another very sensitive nerve of yours. That of Faith! What a sacrilege to the holy evidence and logic.
To make things worse, I listen to the music with faith, love and appreciation for what was given, in some mysterious ways, by the great composers to us. I don't involve any kind of evidence or logic in the listening process. As I do with the people I love. I don't need any evidence or logic in love process. Love is trust and a happiness beyond any evidence or logic.
What a silly and pointless piece of nonsense, obviously
intended to distract from the cul-de-sac your argument has got you
into. And it will fool no-one.
People who denigrate the role of
evidence and logic are usually defending some mystical clap-trap, or, as
obviously in your case, because that very evidence and logic exposes
their argument to ridicule.
As you very well know, this is not about the emotions involved in the appreciation of music but the evidence and logic of the claim that "greatness" is exterior to the human perception of it.
The laughable "evidence" you have supplied so far includes: it's in the score; it's in the rules; it's in the composer's choice of form. Divine revelation seems about as sensible as any "evidence" you have supplied so far.
Your interminable linguistic, semantic and logical gymnastics in defence of the indefensible are amazing, if rather sad.
the evidence and logic of the claim that "greatness" is exterior to the human perception of it.
If I put two bowls of cat food down, my cat goes first to the bowl with the greater amount in it, greatness is understood outside of human perception Vic.
Faith ... sacrilege ... holy .... mysterious
If you are trying to resurrect (!) that argument too and provoke a response, I'm more than up for it but I think Moderators need to consider a new section, such as "Anything else you would like to discuss" that some other forums have. Or you could start a new thread. For such a busy person, you seem to have a lot of time to sustain and provoke argument.
"Greatness" in relation to "greater amount"?
Pot. Kettle. Black.
You need to stick to 'State funded', 'Government statistics', 'Public sector', 'Liberal democracy'.
This is the alternative Dogma that Vic swallows.
My Mom used to say every girl needs a mad aunt. I think every forum needs a Brodsky.
Keep it up chum. You're a hoot!
Vic, I just tried to "pull your leg" and just a bit on the very sensitive to you issue of faith and here you are ready for a new confrontation.
Don't worry, dear chum, logic will always prevail, but, unfortunately, to serve the...other side (be careful who uses the logic and "reason" and for what purpose). Likewise, good prevails but only to serve...evil, which has the actual power. There is a peculiar balance in this world. Sometimes, however, the recipe doesn't work that well and, then, we have a...crisis. Nowadays, it comes more than often (mismangement of logic and good, perhaps).
Vic wrote "My Mom used to say every girl needs a mad aunt."
Haha! Vic must be Victoria!
Only on a Friday night.
So this is the kind of drivel you are reduced to when you can no longer defend an argument with facts, and a fair amount of your "expertise" is found to be "borrowed"?
How to make your parents proud, eh?
They are our parents Victoria, they would be proud of us however we turned out.
I don't claim any "expertise" (you may attribute it me), Vic. So, I don't have to "borrow" anything. I just pass my message, my post. As for the "drivel", check the already existing exchanges and where we stand. That's the drivel we have to be always in.
So, if you want to get "serious" again, answer the so far unanswered or (unanswerable) questions, starting with the one when we had stopped our debate: "Who and when made the the "first" judgement of the musical work for its musical value (not the emotional one)?" To elaborate a bit further the question, I put one more: "Is the musical value of let's say Beethoven's Ninth or the Late String Quartets well established to the extent that there is no room for any other judgement but the acknowledgement of their already existing greatness?"
So, the battlefield is open again,
Regarding your last post to me no 15 I think on page three:
What I was saying to Chris was that we make subjective judgements all the time otherwise I would have no preferences. If greatness were undisputed, objective fact, wouldn't all great composers be equally great?
In the book I have downstairs called The Great Composers, that would mean everyone from Hildegard of Bingen to Thomas Ades is equally great.
So who decides measures of greatness? Relative greatness? Who draws up the league table?
Chris has also got me pondering on whether the emotional impact is written in the text/score. It's an intriguing one that I am having to think about. There's nothing wrong with thinking about issues raised in a debate Parla is there? Gosh! Some of us have actually sometimes been known to modify or change, adapt or amend our positions slightly after listening to the opinions of well-informed others!
Anyway, as I wasn't sure I said to Chris 'it might be', and then offered a couple of 'yes buts'. Chris please note they were intended to be 'yes buts' and not 'no buts' or even worse 'so whatters'!
Parla - your definite view that the emotional impact is not written in the score would, I suspect, not be shared by some, if not many, musicians. My old piano teacher used to say it was marvellous how Beethoven had written into the text of say, a sonata, exactly the interpretation he wanted. Interpretation to me Parla equals expression equals emotion!
Chris, I agree with you on this:
When we first hear a piece ‘uninformed’, our understanding is purely subjective for two reasons:
For many listeners that may be sufficient.
Others may wish to become better informed as to the reasons for their subjective response. Two things regularly aid us in our attempt to be better informed:
I can't see anything wrong with that and I think it is quite a clear process there that you have mapped out. But as you say I think that process helps people to understand better their subjective response(s).