happiness and surprise

From: Guido Heldt (gheldt@zedat.fu-berlin.de)
Date: Tue Apr 30 2002 - 14:52:39 PDT

  • Next message: Charlton Wilbur: "Re: happiness and surprise"

        I'd prefer to turn the question around: More interesting than why
    people
    are interested in the "so-called emotional response to music" (why
    "so-called"? if it feels like emotions, it most probably is) seems to me
    the
    question why people are so persistently interested in "musical value" or
    "the
    work's artistic worth". Don't they trust their own responses to the
    music
    (emotional or otherwise) sufficiently to be able to do without
    musicologically, philosophically etc. authorized guidance?

        Guido Heldt
        gheldt@zedat.fu-berlin.de

    > --------- Forwarded message ----------
    > From: "William H. Rosar" <bc178@lafn.org>
    > To: ams-l@virginia.edu
    > Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 09:58:21 -0500
    > Subject: Re: happiness and surprise
    >
    > >Why is there so much discussion of so-called "emotional response to
    > music" when
    > >there is not a corresponding amount relative to other art forms (e.g.

    > painting,
    > >sculpture, dance, poetry, etc.)? I am reminded of a wisecrack made
    by
    > >Stravinsky where he complained about how people use music like a
    > >"drug," with no
    > >regard to its own properties (properties, I might add, that can be
    > perceived,
    > >not just responded to, unlike most drugs).
    >
    > >Since Leonard B. Meyer much to do has been made of the importance of
    > emotional
    > >response to music, as though it were the sine qua non of musical
    value.
    > As I
    > >have posted here previously Meyer's argument has been largely refuted
    on
    > >philosophical grounds alone by Malcolm Budd in his book _Music and
    > >the Emotions:
    > >The Philosophical Theories_ (1985), Ch. 8 "Meaning, Emotion and
    > Information in
    > >Music."
    >
    > Just a tangential (emotional) response to Bill Rosar's AMS-L posting;
    in
    > a long-ago upper-level undergraduate seminar given by Siegmund
    Levarie,
    > the question of what made a good musical work was posed to us, and
    > several of the students -- we were young, OK?-- still obviously made
    > their judgment of the work's artistic worth contingent on their
    > emotional response to it.
    >
    > Professor Levarie's response to *that* response was swift, vehement,
    and
    > inimitable, and probably literally frightened that idea right out of
    us
    > for the rest of our lives. ;)
    >
    > Theresa Muir
    > theresamuir@juno.com
    >
    > Any fool can handle a crisis, it's this day-to-day that wears you out.

    >
    > Anton Chekhov
    >
    > ________________________________________________________________
    > GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
    > Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
    > Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
    > http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 30 2002 - 15:20:46 PDT