Greatness in Music

[karlhenning]

You crave for answers Karl, on a question that in it self cannot be answered.

And what is wrong or undesirable in that?

So prove to me that it cannot be answered, Harry, rather than simply asserting so!

Artists everywhere and for centuries have operated on the model that some art is great, some of it not great, some of it downright bad.  I am most curious, Harry: what do you know, of which the great artists of the past were in such woful ignorance?  0:)

Think for a second of an artist, Harry:  how does he do his work, if there is no such thing as some art that is not great?  What does it matter how he does his work, if all that determines greatness is, somebody, somewhere liking it?

You know, Harry, I don't care how I finish this piece for three voices and percussion.  Whatever the result is, it's going to be great.

[Scriptavolant]

Think for a second of an artist, Harry:  how does he do his work, if there is no such thing as some art that is not great?  What does it matter how he does his work, if all that determines greatness is, somebody, somewhere liking it?

Everybody loves somebody sometimes..

[Ten thumbs]

The road to 'greatness' usually begins in the composers lifetime. In many cases this is because the quality of the music attracts the attention of the public and it is the public at large who determine the renown in which a composer is held. In the eighteenth century there were many very gifted composers who were not allowed this attention due to the covetousness of their princely masters. Their names are little known today outside of musical circles. Bach nearly fell into this category but fortunately a dedicated campaign led by the Mendelssohns led to his reinstatement in the public perception although he was known to the musical. There are other composers who either suppressed themselves (eg Alkan) or were belittled by prejudice (Mendelssohn outside of England). In some cases the difference is merely one of P.R. e.g. Rachmaninof and Medtner. Who can split them on greatness? but one is in the dictionary, the other is not.
The reason we cannot achieve a satisfactory ranking is that there is no way of repairing the damage done in the past by often accidental factors.

[Harry]

And what is wrong or undesirable in that?

Nothing of course, but then I did not say that right?

So prove to me that it cannot be answered, Harry, rather than simply asserting so!

The prove is in the pudding, we will see what the end result of this thread is, and if your question will be answered.
And I am not simply asserting anything, I think before I write


Artists everywhere and for centuries have operated on the model that some art is great, some of it not great, some of it downright bad.  I am most curious, Harry: what do you know, of which the great artists of the past were in such woeful ignorance?  0:)

I never said anything to reach such a conclusion Karl. I do not agree about the model, so therefore conclusions made out of such a model are of no or little value for me. I never talked about ignorance of great artist from the past, or that they were wrong in their conclusions, but simply that I do not have to agree, and I reject such labels, not their greatness, whatever that may mean!


Think for a second of an artist, Harry:  how does he do his work, if there is no such thing as some art that is not great?  What does it matter how he does his work, if all that determines greatness is, somebody, somewhere liking it?

A artist creates! What he creates is judged by individuals, and not by a body of experts, but I said that already.
If I think something is not to my liking, then it does not matter to me that a body of experts tells me that I have to like it, because they have concluded that it is great art. What if I liked a piece of music what you have written, and a so called musical experts tells me that that composition is crap, what do I care?


You know, Harry, I don't care how I finish this piece for three voices and percussion.  Whatever the result is, it's going to be great.

You simplify the question, and if you have read my reviews, you must know that I am aware of some points of quality.
If I like your piece its great for me yes! What is so wrong with that?
I repeat my self, but think Karl, why should one walk with the mass in saying that something is great or of no worth.
I be the judge of that if you please.

[Josquin des Prez]

Forniscici una stima del tuo quoziente intellettivo, e magari anche una breve bibliografia di studi che mettano in relazione il QI con l'intelligenza musicale. Sarei molto interessato, visto che è il mio settore professionale.

Non fraintendere. Non esiste nessuna correlazione tra quoziente intellettivo proprio e quoziente musicale, per lo meno che io sappia. Ad ogni modo, non era mia intenzione di collegare i due fattori, ma semplicemente fare presente le similitudini (nel senso che entrambi sono variabili fisse). In questo senso, una persona dotata di un alto QI e un grand quantitativo di esperienza puo ancora fallire nella sua comprensione musicale. Il contrario e' anche possibile.

L' esempio piu palese e' Beethoven, un uomo di grande (ma non eccezionale) intelligenza ma dotato di un quoziente musicale tra i piu' alti nella storia della musica.

Riguardo il mio quoziente intellettivo, sfortunatamente lo devo ritenere relativamente basso, in particolare dopo avere sofferto per anni di depressione e ansieta', entrambi avendo considerevoli aversi effetti sulla mia psiche. Il mio quoziente musicale in confronto sembra essere piuttosto buono.

[Harry]

Ja hoor harstikke fijn, waarom niet allemaal in onze eigen taal praten, dan is de Babylonische spraak verwarring compleet. Een nare aangewoonheid van sommige posters!
Einde discussie, zou ik willen zeggen. Nou ja het ging toch geen kant op.
Grootheid, de waan van mensen die het altijd beter weten.

[Harry]

fine but you dint seem too focused or thoughtful....didn't even really specifically address what i was asking? so following your logic every single scientist is of equal value, greatness and importance when stacked up against monumental accomplishments of Isaac Newton? or every writer to the works of William Shakespeare? or every single musician-composer to JS Bach? etc...come on, THINK!

Thinking I do, but I am handicapped by language I guess.
To compare a scientist with a musician is not valid.
In that the term great or greater qualifies.
But music is subjective, you know that!
I am focused and thoughtful, that is again a silly accusation.
I never talked about equal value.

[Scriptavolant]

Ja hoor harstikke fijn, waarom niet allemaal in onze eigen taal praten, dan is de Babylonische spraak verwarring compleet. Een nare aangewoonheid van sommige posters!
Einde discussie, zou ik willen zeggen. Nou ja het ging toch geen kant op.
Grootheid, de waan van mensen die het altijd beter weten.

The parenthesis between me and Josquin was strictly off topic so there's no need to feel offended, you missed nothing related to the topic 

Non fraintendere. Non esiste nessuna correlazione tra quoziente intellettivo proprio e quoziente musicale, per lo meno che io sappia. Ad ogni modo, non era mia intenzione di collegare i due fattori, ma semplicemente fare presente le similitudini (nel senso che entrambi sono variabili fisse). In questo senso, una persona dotata di un alto QI e un grand quantitativo di esperienza puo ancora fallire nella sua comprensione musicale. Il contrario e' anche possibile.

L' esempio piu palese e' Beethoven, un uomo di grande (ma non eccezionale) intelligenza ma dotato di un quoziente musicale tra i piu' alti nella storia della musica.

Riguardo il mio quoziente intellettivo, sfortunatamente lo devo ritenere relativamente basso, in particolare dopo avere sofferto per anni di depressione e ansieta', entrambi avendo considerevoli aversi effetti sulla mia psiche. Il mio quoziente musicale in confronto sembra essere piuttosto buono.

The first point is clear, by the way I didn't know Beethoven's IQ was ever measured, and I suspect that it wasn't measured when he was alive (IQ measures weren't assessed), so maybe it's a just a theoretical construct which I wouldn't rely on too seriously. The thing that he was one of the greatest musical intelligence ever I think it's undeniable, even without a precise quantification.
On the otherside, I didn't even know depression/anxiety were related to IQ, in the sense that they may influence your cognitive functions (such as reading, studying, learning, recalling) but not lower your general IQ. This sounds new to me, I'll check out.

[quintett op.57]

Greatness in what?

- giving pleasure? which pleasure?
emotional?
strictly auditive pleasure?

- expressing feelings?
- sending a message?
- surprising?

I'm just wondering if everyone of these propositions are related to pleasure (In fact? I think i already have my answer). There are so many different pleasures, even in hearing.

[quintett op.57]

music is not like basket-ball.

In basket-ball, we all expecting the guys to win the game.
In music, we all have different expectations

In basket-ball we're always happy because our team has won
In music it's not always the same thing which gives the most pleasure

Greatness in music, and in art in general, takes different forms, these forms are not stable and everyone has a different perception of these forms.

[quintett op.57]

As a conclusion, I wouldn't say all the composers have the same level of greatness.
But don't try to rank them.

Don't try to rank guys like Handel, Vivaldi, Bach, Haydn and Mozart, you would even ignore what you're doing.

[Don]

Not really, per my market definition I can define greatness as the degree of esteem which the culture as a whole holds the music.  The criteria for greatness is the collective responses to the work by the individual members of the culture.  These responses incorporate every factor by which one judges music without having to decide which factors are more important than others.  Nor is every member of the culture given an equal vote.  The great musicians and writers about music have a disproportate voice, although the aggregate of individual listeners not ignored.  

Who will determine who are the great musicians and writers?  This strikes me as a solution that raises additional problems.

[bwv 1080]

Who will determine who are the great musicians and writers?  This strikes me as a solution that raises additional problems.

The culture as a whole

[Gurn Blanston]

There are so many undefined terms in this discussion that it can't ever be resolved, just as Harry says. Words like "value", "greatness", and even "haarstikke"! What IS the value of music? If you can't come right out and say it in words we can understand, then it is merely a nebulous concept and can't be debated. Is music inherently valuable? Extrinsically? Value to me might be nothing to you. In the mid-18th century, J.S. Bach was not viewed as great or valuable, not only by listeners, but by musicians either. He was considered arcane and dated, and playing and/or listening to his music did not give pleasure. So where is the inherent value there? It was only later conferred on his music by a later generation with different standards. Same for Mozart, same for Beethoven. And Ditters and Vanhal were "stars", for those of you who don't know it. Were the people who deemed them such, and they were legion AND knowledgable, so totally wrong? So no, let's not just say that music is inherently valuable or not not, shall we?

Greatness. Ditto.

These are personal, subjective concepts that we are putting on music because they suit our present style. Or in the case of the nonconformists, they don't fit our present style. We like things that are simple or complicated, melodic or atonal, sound traditional or non-traditional. And whatever our personal set of standards is most attracted by, and whatever we have read in liner notes and books, then that becomes our personal "greatness", with its corollary "value".

And I'll add, those who decry judging composers, let's say 18th century composers, by 19th century standards and then turn right around and do it, are, to say the least, amusing.

So, let's get some things defined. Adjectives that we are throwing around are those with too much reliance on subjectivity. And also, please don't categorically include anyone but oneself in making sweeping statements. I, for one, would sooner listen to Ditters than Mahler any day. I don't recommend that YOU do. Or even care, actually.

[karlhenning]

Greatness in music, and in art in general, takes different forms, these forms are not stable and everyone has a different perception of these forms.

Excellent.

[JoshLilly]

The only time I care is when some pompous windbag tries to enforce their taste as if it were some kind of fact. Which happens sickeningly often.

[Josquin des Prez]

so maybe it's a just a theoretical construct which I wouldn't rely on too seriously.

Perhaps, but it seems to be the general assumption regarding Beethoven. He didn't seem to be a very good student, was only partially educated and couldn't write well (supposedly). Whether that's a good indication of his inherent IQ or not, it does seem he had to struggle when it came to certain mental related tasks. Then again, maybe he only looks bad if compared to savants like Mozart. At this level of genius, even the exceptional can look ordinary.

On the otherside, I didn't even know depression/anxiety were related to IQ, in the sense that they may influence your cognitive functions (such as reading, studying, learning, recalling) but not lower your general IQ. This sounds new to me, I'll check out.

Well, i actually never tested myself, but i can definitely notice a difference as the years go buy. I did found an article that linked depression with a reduction in brain size (similar to alcohol abuse), but at the time it scared me a bit too much so i ignored it. Either way, i seriously feel my mental powers are waining. I'm in a constant state of brain fog, derealization and confusion. I can't concentrate, can't gather my thoughts, my short term memory is gone, i can't seem to either grasp things as quickly or learn new concepts, and it just keeps getting worst. I just recently started to skip words when i write sentences. I don't know what it is, but it scares the crap out of me. Worst of all, i have a chronic case of anhedonia. 

If it's doing this to me i can only assume Beethoven suffered from similar impairments, which might explain his relatively poor mental related achievements outside music.

[Don]

The culture as a whole

If "as a whole", that would result in the winners being rock, rap and country stars.  

[Scriptavolant]

If "as a whole", that would result in the winners being rock, rap and country stars. 

Culture as a hole, then.

[Scriptavolant]

Well, i actually never tested myself, but i can definitely notice a difference as the years go buy. I did found an article that linked depression with a reduction in brain size (similar to alcohol abuse), but at the time it scared me a bit too much so i ignored it. Either way, i seriously feel my mental powers are waining. I'm in a constant state of brain fog, derealization and confusion. I can't concentrate, can't gather my thoughts, my short term memory is gone, i can't seem to either grasp things as quickly or learn new concepts, and it just keeps getting worst. I just recently started to skip words when i write sentences. I don't know what it is, but it scares the crap out of me. Worst of all, i have a chronic case of anhedonia. 

I've PMed you to avoid being off topic.