What is the 'composer's intention?'

[Karl Henning]

[...] But art is often larger/deeper/wider than what the artist consciously puts into their work.

Very true.

[Monsieur Croche]

I freely confess to wondering why I, as a listener, should bother with music that is not interested in communicating (or rather, was composed by someone who is not interested in communicating).

Oh, please, pray tell us just exactly how you can tell the music, or the composer, is ''not interested in communicating.''

BTW, it was somewhere around the last quarter of the last century when copyright law [U.S. anyway,] was changed to allow a sound recording to obtain copyright; prior that, the only way to obtain copyright was by submitting written score.
The effected change of law was spearheaded by those composers of the Darmstadt group who had to make extensive graphic scores of electronic pieces that had been realized on tape in order to secure copyright.
Writing it down is no longer the only way to 'demonstrate' or realize an intent that you want others to hear your piece.[/u]


Best regards.

[North Star]

To my mind, Aaron Copland said it best:

Precisely.

When words leave off, music begins.

[Monsieur Croche]

But art is often larger/deeper/wider than what the artist consciously puts into their work. Someone who is seemingly writing just for himself or herself may inadvertently be speaking to quite an audience.

Mike

I know that may read as weird and heavily mysticism laden to a younger generation of very up to date and contemporary post-modern and post-modernist folk, and well, it is.

But don't worry, right now, using available grants monies, neurologists and psychologists are working on the answers, and therefore, a ''solution,'' to that will be forthcoming.

[Karl Henning]

Thank God for studies.

[James]

The Copland quote is great ..

Quite true, but also at the very beginning of a composition, and perhaps even up until the very end, all intentions that a composer has may very well just be entirely about the organisation of sounds themselves.

Music is a very human activity, it is a form of expression. Inspiration for a composition can take many forms. You name it. An emotional state, religion/spirituality, landscapes, the opposite sex, dreams, paintings, literature, poetry, science, space etc. It's endless. Including folks who take the stance that music can be defined as a collection of incidental sounds with little or no human intervention (other than explaining how/why with words afterward though! haha) - whether convincing or not, this too is derived or took inspiration from certain philosophies and cultures. However, highly conscious composition is often way more than merely organizing surface sounds - there is an inner life to the music - there are musical themes, motifs, seed ideas, etc. ..  that are developed, expanded and transformed carefully to tell a story in essence, with characters, mood, setting/context - there are connections, implications, dialog, relationships to what is happening at all levels of it's construction. All of this is communicated as best as possible within a highly thought out, (often edited, numerous 'drafts') and written musical text (score) that can be read. It isn't random, or incidental. Music is being communicated with it's very own system that has existed for centuries. A huge body of musical literature. There can be an an arc, or a long line that runs through it all. Where everything has it's place or purpose within the whole, all built from a single idea. Much like how in literature the author (a composer of words, as opposed to notes) expands on a central or underlying theme/idea(s) and a story is being told. Even during rehearsals, musicians use lingo (verbal, or with their instruments to one another) that only exists within the music world itself to convey or communicate a desired result.

[jochanaan]

The Copland quote is great ..

He thanks you from The Beyond.

The secret of effective quoting: brief, seldom, and well-sourced.

[Karl Henning]

The secret of effective quoting: brief, seldom, and well-sourced.

Is that a Remark?

Thank God for studies.

0:)

[James]

Anyway, it's clear that the idea that music is a language is not going to just go away. Music and language do share certain characteristics, or at least seem to do so.

Both are languages of their own. Look at a book. Look at a score. And of course, both languages (words & music) mix well.

Music or ANY art (including literature) that is totally esoteric says little to most people - communication breakdown in other words.

[knight66]

I know that may read as weird and heavily mysticism laden to a younger generation of very up to date and contemporary post-modern and post-modernist folk, and well, it is.

But don't worry, right now, using available grants monies, neurologists and psychologists are working on the answers, and therefore, a ''solution,'' to that will be forthcoming.

Of course, you don't lnow what I did before I retired.

Mike

[Florestan]

The reason for composing is to make interesting sounds and combinations of sounds.

I cannot help quoting Paul Badura-Skoda again:

If a person writes music with a great knowledge and a great artistry, but if there's no love, no urge to communicate something which is more than just the notes, I cannot be moved.

Amen!

[James]

If a person writes music with a great knowledge and a great artistry, but if there's no love, no urge to communicate something which is more than just the notes, I cannot be moved. Amen!

But to have **GREAT** knowledge or artistry there has to be an urge and passion involved though - and this will shine through anyway and move us. Even when we are just dealing with the music itself. It all goes hand & hand.

[ritter]

I cannot help quoting Paul Badura-Skoda again:

If a person writes music with a great knowledge and a great artistry, but if there's no love, no urge to communicate something which is more than just the notes, I cannot be moved.
Amen!

I''m thrilled to learn that Mr. Badura-Skoda is moved by music in which he senses the composer has the urge to communicate something, but I am hard pressed to find in his text any evidence to prove that the way he is moved is actually the way the composer allegedly wanted him to be moved. So, I'm afraid this pianist speaks only for a segment of the music-loving public  (which is perfectly fine).

Some others of us can identify more with this quote by our beloved Igor Feodorovich:

"For I consider that music is, by its very nature, essentially powerless to express anything at all, whether a feeling, an attitude of mind, a psychological mood, a phenomenon of nature, etc. Expression has never been an inherent property of music. That is by no means the purpose of its existence. If, as is nearly always the case, music appears to express something, this is only an illusion and not a reality. It is simply an additional attribute which, by tacit and inveterate agreement, we have lent it, thrust upon it, as a label, a convention – in short, an aspect which, unconsciously or by force of habit, we have come to confuse with its essential being."

Cheers,

[Monsieur Croche]

Of course, you don't lnow what I did before I retired.

Mike

Let me guess...
You were either a researcher in Neurology / or Psychology, or both. / You were the founder of an Ashram, or something like.

You've done all three. 

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

The Copland quote is great ..


Music is a very human activity, it is a form of expression. Inspiration for a composition can take many forms. You name it. An emotional state, religion/spirituality, landscapes, the opposite sex, dreams, paintings, literature, poetry, science, space etc. It's endless. Including folks who take the stance that music can be defined as a collection of incidental sounds with little or no human intervention (other than explaining how/why with words afterward though! haha) - whether convincing or not, this too is derived or took inspiration from certain philosophies and cultures. However, highly conscious composition is often way more than merely organizing surface sounds - there is an inner life to the music - there are musical themes, motifs, seed ideas, etc. ..  that are developed, expanded and transformed carefully to tell a story in essence, with characters, mood, setting/context - there are connections, implications, dialog, relationships to what is happening at all levels of it's construction. All of this is communicated as best as possible within a highly thought out, (often edited, numerous 'drafts') and written musical text (score) that can be read. It isn't random, or incidental. Music is being communicated with it's very own system that has existed for centuries. A huge body of musical literature. There can be an an arc, or a long line that runs through it all. Where everything has it's place or purpose within the whole, all built from a single idea. Much like how in literature the author (a composer of words, as opposed to notes) expands on a central or underlying theme/idea(s) and a story is being told. Even during rehearsals, musicians use lingo (verbal, or with their instruments to one another) that only exists within the music world itself to convey or communicate a desired result.

Precisely.

[Karl Henning]

I cannot help quoting Paul Badura-Skoda again:

If a person writes music with a great knowledge and a great artistry, but if there's no love, no urge to communicate something which is more than just the notes, I cannot be moved.

Amen!

I cannot help asking: how does he tell if "there's no love"?

[Monsieur Croche]

I cannot help quoting Paul Badura-Skoda again:

If a person writes music with a great knowledge and a great artistry, but if there’s no love, no urge to communicate something which is more than just the notes, I cannot be moved.

I'm thinkin' the failure here is in recognizing that almost all of those who go the full length of YEARS to study, practice and develop any decent level skills in composing can safely be assumed to be first attracted, then in love with music itself. I'd say for the overwhelming majority of composers, the drive to compose comes from their love of music, that they are deeply knowing it can 'communicate something' -- after all, it reached out to them and seized them, wholly -- and whenever they are 'putting together things that sound well together' they don't need to consciously dwell upon, or make a freakin' advert about, 'their love in the music or the piece they are writing.' The work itself, whether it is a commission with a deadline or a piece 'they are writing for their self,' is a labor of love.

There seems to be a most peculiar and I think non defensible sort of idea-rationale that some sentiments are -- more like 'were,' -- only possible to express in some 'older style' vocabulary.

The quote itself is a masterwork poster boy for a groundless and non provable and never to be proven claim as a more than feeble justification for not understanding or liking a piece because, you know, ''I'm not feelin' the love in this piece.'' For justifying all you do not understand or like, what an ideal straw man / red-herring that is.

IF instead someone would say, ''They're singing songs of love, but not for me.'' -- they would be being both more open minded and at least a bit more honest, I think.

Best regards.

[Madiel]

Interest in having the music engage with someone else is something every composer always wants

Then as far as I'm concerned that is "communicating". And it seems to me that this entire conversation, stretching over many threads and pages, is based on a misapprehension if you think that those of us talking about "communicating" are looking for anything more than that.

[Madiel]

Oh, please, pray tell us just exactly how you can tell the music, or the composer, is ''not interested in communicating.''

Sigh. You're now responding to something I wrote while following someone else's hypothetical proposition that such music/composers existed.

In other words you should ask "some guy", who extolled the potential value of music that is not interested in communicating, how he can tell that there is music that is not interested in communicating. Not me.

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

I'm thinkin' the failure here is in recognizing that almost all of those who go the full length of YEARS to study, practice and develop any decent level skills in composing can safely be assumed to be first attracted, then in love with music itself. I'd say for the overwhelming majority of composers, the drive to compose comes from their love of music, that they are deeply knowing it can 'communicate something' -- after all, it reached out to them and seized them, wholly -- and whenever they are 'putting together things that sound well together' they don't need to consciously dwell upon, or make a freakin' advert about, 'their love in the music or the piece they are writing.' The work itself, whether it is a commission with a deadline or a piece 'they are writing for their self,' is a labor of love.

There seems to be a most peculiar and I think non defensible sort of idea-rationale that some sentiments are -- more like 'were,' -- only possible to express in some 'older style' vocabulary.

The quote itself is a masterwork poster boy for a groundless and non provable and never to be proven claim as a more than feeble justification for not understanding or liking a piece because, you know, ''I'm not feelin' the love in this piece.'' For justifying all you do not understand or like, what an ideal straw man / red-herring that is.

IF instead someone would say, ''They're singing songs of love, but not for me.'' -- they would be being both more open minded and at least a bit more honest, I think.

With your last paragraph...I think some people may also feel that there is such thing also as an audience's 'entitlement' to music, music which is written in order to suit their wants and desires.....it's as if some people believe that music should move rather than they should listen to and be moved by music simply because it's there for anyone. When people start using this point of view then music becomes a consumer product and not a form of art. Sometimes I feel that people's wish for music to communicate something to them stems out of the same (rather American/capitalistic) belief that music should be composed to the dictates of an audience's tastes/wants.