I don't know if we had this discussion before, but inspired by a remark in another thread, I think it's an interesting matter.
Suppose one hears the Symphonie Fantastique for the first time, but without knowing the title nor anything at all about the story. How likely is it that he'll be able to reconstruct the program from the music itself? IMO, chances are zero.
The same can be said about each and every program music out there. Take out the titles and any reference to the context in such works as Annees de pelerinage, Also Sprach Zarathustra or The Swan of Tuonela --- what remains is just as absolute music as any Mozart's piano sonata or Brahms' symphony and I wonder how many of the first-time, context-ignorant listeners would be reminded of Wilhelm Tell, Petrarca, Nietzsche or Kalevala? More, I wonder how many experienced listeners, those who know the extra-musical context, really "hear" them in the music?
So, the question is twofold:
(1) Do you think music can really "paint" sonically, that is, can it really generate in the listener some "preset" extra-musical associations?
IMO, the answer is "no". If it weren't for the titles and sections, I would have never thought about precisely Till Eulenspiegel or Don Quijote in Strauss' tone poems.
(2) How do you listen / respond to program music? Story or literary work in hand trying to follow it musically and get the "preset" reaction, or just like any other absolute music and get a "genuine" reaction, which might or might not coincide with the composer's intention?
For me it's the latter.
Quote from: Florestan on May 25, 2011, 04:07:14 AM
I don't know if we had this discussion before, but inspired by a remark in another thread, I think it's an interesting matter.
Suppose one hears the Symphonie Fantastique for the first time, but without knowing the title nor anything at all about the story. How likely is it that he'll be able to reconstruct the program from the music itself? IMO, chances are zero.
The same can be said about each and every program music out there. Take out the titles and any reference to the context in such works as Annees de pelerinage, Also Sprach Zarathustra or The Swan of Tuonela --- what remains is just as absolute music as any Mozart's piano sonata or Brahms' symphony and I wonder how many of the first-time, context-ignorant listeners would be reminded of Wilhelm Tell, Petrarca, Nietzsche or Kalevala? More, I wonder how many experienced listeners, those who know the extra-musical context, really "hear" them in the music?
So, the question is twofold:
(1) Do you think music can really "paint" sonically, that is, can it really generate in the listener some "preset" extra-musical associations?
IMO, the answer is "no". If it weren't for the titles and sections, I would have never thought about precisely Till Eulenspiegel or Don Quijote in Strauss' tone poems.
(2) How do you listen / respond to program music? Story or literary work in hand trying to follow it musically and get the "preset" reaction, or just like any other absolute music and get a "genuine" reaction, which might or might not coincide with the composer's intention?
For me it's the latter.
In answer to 1) vaguely, yes, since certain musical devices have a widely understood onomatopoetic effect suggesting undulating water, wind in the trees, etc. Hence things like La Mer or the prelude to Der Fliegende Hollaender are likely to suggest the surging sea. Similarly, LvB's 6th is going to suggest a meandering brook, a storm, etc. An ominous-to-triumphant march with heavy, martial brass as in Respighi's "Pines of the Appian Way" easily suggests soldiers marching. Whether these associations are all culturally inculcated or inherent neurological responses to certain sound patterns and timbres, I don't know.
Here, btw, is a nice performance of the Respighi:
http://www.youtube.com/v/O2kb2kZSxFA
While I love a lot of tone poems and ballet music (which is de facto program music when nobody's dancing), I do have some of these conceptual problems.
I try to listen to it as absolute music. However, I invariably start thinking what a certain section is supposed to represent. If I don't know what it depicts, then I feel like I'm missing something. That can be frustrating.
And certainly, one can't reconstruct the scenario just from the music. One might get a vague impression ("people are celebrating"; "a battle is going on"; "something triumphant just happened"). But nothing beyond that.
Maybe this is why I generally prefer the abstract forms, like symphony or concerto. On the other hand, I don't have problems with music that's meant not to tell a story but rather to depict a mood or scene or personality (examples: Honegger's Pacific 231, Martinu's Frescoes of Piero della Francesca, Sibelius' Tapiola). I can fully enjoy such music without being distracted by the storyline.
Quote from: Grazioso on May 25, 2011, 04:26:46 AM
In answer to 1) vaguely, yes, since certain musical devices have a widely understood onomatopoetic effect suggesting undulating water, wind in the trees, etc. Hence things like La Mer or the prelude to Der Fliegende Hollaender are likely to suggest the surging sea. Similarly, LvB's 6th is going to suggest a meandering brook, a storm, etc. An ominous-to-triumphant march with heavy, martial brass as in Respighi's "Pines of the Appian Way" easily suggests soldiers marching.
Oh, certainly. But it is one thing to hear "undulating water" --- and quite another to think precisely about Undine or Loreley. :)
Quote from: Velimir on May 25, 2011, 04:27:59 AM
I try to listen to it as absolute music. However, I invariably start thinking what a certain section is supposed to represent. If I don't know what it depicts, then I feel like I'm missing something. That can be frustrating.
It happens to me that sometimes the reaction the music elicits from me is quite contrary to what the composer had in mind. For instance, I've never heard anything scaffold-ish in the corresponding section of the Fantastique's. :)
Quote from: Florestan on May 25, 2011, 04:07:14 AM
Take out the titles and any reference to the context in such works as Annees de pelerinage, Also Sprach Zarathustra or The Swan of Tuonela --- what remains is just as absolute music as any Mozart's piano sonata or Brahms' symphony
One can reverse that, too, since people often ascribe concepts or stories to supposedly absolute music: "It's about death. It's about ascending to Heaven. It's about X, Y, or Z." It seems like a common, natural desire to interpret music in such a way, just as we do with painting, architecture, etc.: we tell stories about it. With formal program music, the composer just beats us to the punch :)
Of course, then we start asking just how well his story matches the music, but that's half the fun...
Quote from: Grazioso on May 25, 2011, 04:57:04 AM
One can reverse that, too, since people often ascribe concepts or stories to supposedly absolute music: "It's about death. It's about ascending to Heaven. It's about X, Y, or Z." It seems like a common, natural desire to interpret music in such a way, just as we do with painting, architecture, etc.: we tell stories about it.
Or even more readily than with painting, architecture, &c. which are representational media — since music is so maddeningly (and exquisitely) abstract. So who's to say I'm wrong if I hear exploding porpoises in Debussy's Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune? ; )
Quote from: Grazioso on May 25, 2011, 04:57:04 AM
One can reverse that, too, since people often ascribe concepts or stories to supposedly absolute music: "It's about death. It's about ascending to Heaven. It's about X, Y, or Z." It seems like a common, natural desire to interpret music in such a way, just as we do with painting, architecture, etc.: we tell stories about it.
It would be an interesting experiment to have 10 people listening, say, Brahms' 3rd and asking them to write down whatever story it evoked. How many would be about the same thing, I wonder? :)
I remember
Brian describing the "story" he ascribed to Sibelius' 5th --- it was completely at odd with what I hear in it. :D
Yes, we've even been at odds just settling on an "overall emotional theme" for this or that symphony. (Of course, it's probably a good thing for a breadth of interpretation, not to lock a symphony down to but one "overall emotional theme" . . . .)
Quote from: Florestan on May 25, 2011, 05:04:22 AM
It would be an interesting experiment to have 10 people listening, say, Brahms' 3rd and asking them to write down whatever story it evoked. How many would be about the same thing, I wonder? :)
I remember Brian describing the "story" he ascribed to Sibelius' 5th --- it was completely at odd with what I hear in it. :D
The more detail becomes involved, the more unique such an explanation would be to the individual, but in a broad sense I do believe that a programme of some kind can be imposed on absolute music. Two examples:
1. Vaughan Williams' "London Symphony". Despite the piece being a perfect a representation of the spirit of the place, without the title it would not immediately suggest the city to many listeners. But at the same time, certain qualities painted by the music (mist unfolding, a nocturne movement, several grand themes contrasted with ones of whirling carnival energy) could easily suggest a bustling city to many people independently of any description or title on offer to them. In addition to this, some listeners have found themselves infuriated by RVW's lack of programme notes for a piece with a title that promises so much along these lines, and have imposed "unsanctioned" programmes onto the music. One of these moments has become common enough for people to believe it was the composer's attention - the harp apparently mirrors the chimes the bells of the Westminster clock tower emerging from the fog. The composer has this to say on the subject:
"If listeners recognise suggestions of such things as the Westminster Chimes or the Lavender Cry, they are asked to consider these as accidents, not as essentials, of the music."And yet, coincidence or not, such a prominent part in the music, and in the amount of things a harp could reasonably closely represent, could imagine others hearing bells without any prompting.
2. The three movements of Sibelius' third symphony do seem to evoke similar pictorial emotions in several people I have spoken to about it, despite seemingly no text prompting emanating from the composer. These is a first movement involving some manner of passage, or striving, though not particularly hard-won, a middle movement of romance, dance or peace, and a final movement in which understanding is achieved through the previous two movements - a kind of acceptance or uneasy peace. There are musical elements to suggest very, very broad concepts such as this - the finale utilises an extended postlude type of form, with a certain sense of either receding into infinity, or a steady passage. This is all a vague and impractical theory, though :)
To answer the original question - I find it impossible to listen to programme music pointalistically, even where the action of a particular moment is pointed out in the score. I don't believe that many composers were that literal with their compositions - many added notes after the music was written. Often I don't read the notes - I take the title, and associations I already have with that (including colour) and use it as a marker point for my listening. Every time I listen again, rather than try to investigate the action, my spiritual associations to the subject matter come more into play - when I think of Liszt's Orpheus, I do not imagine a painfully recreated scene of Liszt's own devising, I use the music as a catalyst for my previous experiences with the subject matter - a cover of a book I recognise, associated art and text passages. These contribute to my focus on the work as a piece of absolute music, shaded and given weight by my other associations. It's a bizarre thing to try to describe!
Quote from: Lethe Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on May 25, 2011, 05:36:52 AM
. . . 1. Vaughan Williams' "London Symphony". Despite the piece being a perfect a representation of the spirit of the place, without the title it would not immediately suggest the city to many listeners.
Although the chimes of Big Ben are one of the most recognizable musical ideas in the world.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 25, 2011, 05:41:19 AM
Although the chimes of Big Ben are one of the most recognizable musical ideas in the world.
Those chimes have been widely copied. The London Symphony doesn't evoke the spirit of London to me, and I know what the symphony is about, and I've been to London.
Is there but one spirit of London?
EDIT: I somehow missed the previous replies in this thread and therefore some of my comments presented below may seem redundant.
Quote from: Florestan on May 25, 2011, 04:07:14 AM
(1) Do you think music can really "paint" sonically, that is, can it really generate in the listener some "preset" extra-musical associations?
IMO, the answer is "no". If it weren't for the titles and sections, I would have never thought about precisely Till Eulenspiegel or Don Quijote in Strauss' tone poems.
There are probably exceptions here: the
1812 Overture, for example. Why would someone insert the French anthem in there? And not to mention cannon shots. If not the programme, the test subject might at least be curious about those and perhaps try to reconstruct what the music is about. Of course, we are only hypothesising. :) We should conduct this experiment alongside the one about trying to see how long teen-aged Lady Gaga fans will listen classical music. ;)
Quote(2) How do you listen / respond to program music? Story or literary work in hand trying to follow it musically and get the "preset" reaction, or just like any other absolute music and get a "genuine" reaction, which might or might not coincide with the composer's intention?
For me it's the latter.
Sometimes I just don't bother about the story and therefore don't know "how" to react. Dvořák's tone poems come to mind. His music is attractive as it is, and I rarely listen with the programme in hand (or in mind). :) Oh, and till now I don't "get" the programme behind
Il Quattro Staggioni. It is perhaps not the same kind as the Romantic version of the genre, but I still have trouble telling which musical effect corresponds to which seasonal characteristic... well, except the summer storm.
Quote from: Opus106 on May 25, 2011, 05:53:25 AM
There are probably exceptions here: the 1812 Overture, for example. Why would someone insert the French anthem in there? And not to mention cannon shots.
Yes, that one is pretty explicit, especially when in the end the Russian Imperial anthem takes over anything else in a majestic, triumphant fanfare.
Quote from: Opus106 on May 25, 2011, 05:53:25 AM
Oh, and till now I don't "get" the programme behind Il Quattro Staggioni. It is perhaps not the same kind as the Romantic version of the genre, but I still have trouble telling which musical effect corresponds to which seasonal characteristic... well, except the summer storm.
In the slow movement of "Winter" I picture those ostinato plucked strings as snowflakes falling gently --- but
only because of the title. :)
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 25, 2011, 05:01:51 AM
So who's to say I'm wrong if I hear exploding porpoises in Debussy's Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune? ; )
That was actually depicted in the rejected fourth movement of
La Mer, a minuet and trio called "Procession of the Exploding Porpoises w/ Belly Dance of the Salacious Mermaids"
Quote from: Lethe Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on May 25, 2011, 05:36:52 AM
2. The three movements of Sibelius' third symphony do seem to evoke similar pictorial emotions in several people I have spoken to about it, despite seemingly no text prompting emanating from the composer. These is a first movement involving some manner of passage, or striving, though not particularly hard-won, a middle movement of romance, dance or peace, and a final movement in which understanding is achieved through the previous two movements - a kind of acceptance or uneasy peace. There are musical elements to suggest very, very broad concepts such as this - the finale utilises an extended postlude type of form, with a certain sense of either receding into infinity, or a steady passage. This is all a vague and impractical theory, though :)
I wonder how much this sort of interpretation might be colored by our shared cultural experience with film/TV and its music, where composers often turn to certain conventional styles or devices to accompany certain visual or thematic elements on screen.
Schehehrezade is pretty clear. Ives' Central Park in the Dark too.
Quote from: bigshot on May 25, 2011, 11:01:29 AM
Schehehrezade is pretty clear.
Really? Each movement could represent that story from the 1,001 Nights and no other? ; )
I haven't read this thread in detail but would like to say that R. Strauss was supposed to be superb at depicting things in sound.
Quote from: bigshot on May 25, 2011, 11:01:29 AM
Schehehrezade is pretty clear.
Is it? If it weren't for the general and section titles, would you have been able to tell which particular
1,001 Nights story it depicts --- or even that it has anything to do with it at all?
Quote from: Mn Dave on May 25, 2011, 11:10:00 AM
R. Strauss was supposed to be superb at depicting things in sound.
I find the notion that one can depict musically a particular philosophy rather flawed. ;D
Quote from: Florestan on May 25, 2011, 11:19:34 AM
I find the notion that one can depict musically a particular philosophy rather flawed. ;D
THINGS like wind, rain and puppies.
Quote from: Mn Dave on May 25, 2011, 11:26:36 AM
THINGS like wind, rain and puppies.
More wind machine, Fred . . . .
Quote from: Leon on May 25, 2011, 11:25:38 AM
I find it a seriously flawed proposal that if one does not know the program then they would be unable to enjoy or get anything out of the music.
I agree.
Quote from: Mn Dave on May 25, 2011, 11:26:36 AM
THINGS like wind, rain and puppies.
Wind, rain and puppies do not a philosophy make, though. ;D
I can not hear what is being depicted unless I'm told of it in advance. I listen to music abstractly, but I grant that knowing the program gives another level of appreciation for the piece and both forms of appreciation have merit.
Quote from: haydnfan on May 25, 2011, 01:19:33 PM
I can not hear what is being depicted unless I'm told of it in advance. I listen to music abstractly, but I grant that knowing the program gives another level of appreciation for the piece and both forms of appreciation have merit.
Generally agree. Recently listened to Liszt's Faust Symphony. Would never have guess that I was hearing musical portraits of Faust and Mephistopheles, but that knowledge gives me another thing to ponder and compare to when listening. I might have noticed that the finale made use of themes from the first movement, but I would not have know that this was meant to suggest Mephistopheles as an alter-ego of Faust, for instance.
Quote from: Lethe Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on May 25, 2011, 05:36:52 AM
The three movements of Sibelius' third symphony do seem to evoke similar pictorial emotions in several people I have spoken to about it, despite seemingly no text prompting emanating from the composer. These is a first movement involving some manner of passage, or striving, though not particularly hard-won, a middle movement of romance, dance or peace, and a final movement in which understanding is achieved through the previous two movements - a kind of acceptance or uneasy peace. There are musical elements to suggest very, very broad concepts such as this - the finale utilises an extended postlude type of form, with a certain sense of either receding into infinity, or a steady passage.
What you have described is not "pictorial" but emotional, an area of music which is much less controversial (I think).
For me, the problem with program music is that it can disrupt the purely musical structure which I look for to make sense of the work.
The power of music is the very vagueness of the purpose it has. This enables it to transcend both different cultures and different eras.
Of course some music can have a very specific meaning, music for the theatre (opera, ballet etc) and film is meant to directly express particular scenes within a story. Even then though it can transcend that sometimes and be listened to without a specific story in mind. Sometimes this is done by abstracting certain parts of the score into a suite. Whether music is completely absolute or programmatic it probably still uses a kind of dramatic structure to convey the musical journey and to engage the listener.
Music does not exist in a vacuum ; you cannot divorce it altogether from the extra-musical .
Of course ,many works have no program at all and were not intended by the composers to represent
concrete things or abstract ideas . But they often do seem to have expressive character ,and composers often add
markings such as "espressivo", "con fuoco", "dolce" (sweetly") , etc to request the performer or performers to convey some kind of expression .
Even Stravinsky, who famously declared that music was "powerless to express anything" and that composers "merely combine notes", wrote some graphically programmatic music, such as in The Rite of Spring, Petrushka, and The Firebird..
For example, in the fair scene in Petrushka, a tuba is supposed to represent a dancing bear, and it certainly sounds like one ! The shimmering sounds of the Firebird are highly evocative .
Quote from: Superhorn on May 26, 2011, 07:15:34 AM
Even Stravinsky, who famously declared that music was "powerless to express anything" and that composers "merely combine notes"
I wonder sometimes if we should believe anything Stravinsky ever said lol.
Quote from: Superhorn on May 26, 2011, 07:15:34 AM
Music does not exist in a vacuum ; you cannot divorce it altogether from the extra-musical.
Um, but music by its nature is not representational.
What in the natural world does a major triad, by its own mere nature, "represent"?
Quote from: starrynight on May 26, 2011, 07:17:44 AM
I wonder sometimes if we should believe anything Stravinsky ever said lol.
So, without being guided by something outside the triad: what does a C Major triad express? Take your time, we've all day . . . .
I think nature and the non-musical world made by man is full of sounds. I don't think it's so much about a single chord, but a rhythm perhaps that can equate to non-musical things like the beating of a heart for example. Sound waves themselves have a kind of oscillating rhythm/vibrations, being waves of a kind? I'm guessing a bit on that last point though as I having read up on this subject recently.
Quote from: starrynight on May 26, 2011, 07:30:45 AM
I think nature and the non-musical world made by man is full of sounds. I don't think it's so much about a single chord, but a rhythm perhaps that can equate to non-musical things like the beating of a heart for example. Sound waves themselves have a kind of oscillating rhythm/vibrations, being waves of a kind? I'm guessing a bit on that last point though as I having read up on this subject recently.
Sound waves are caused by vibrations and oscillate with the same frequency. A pure sound wave is simply a tone at a specific frequency. You can produce such by banging a tuning fork. All sound are superpositions of sound waves resulting in complex patterns that can be talking, music, noise etc so even though each sound wave is periodic, not all sound is, and is thus not necessarily rhythmic.
And all sound is interpreted by the brain using the reception of these sound waves as well, trying to make sense of the complex sounds around us (just like with music I suppose).
I first read about the "program music" 'problem' in a booklet from Beethovens 6th Symphony. Program music as some sort of intellectually weak concept, in its weakness only beaten by pop music.
I do not care. I rather like it if there's an underlying program. As e.g. in DSCH 11. Or Sibelius' Tone Poems. It's a helpful programmatic advice and there's still enough room for my phantasy. Finding all the coincidence between the music and the program makes me appreciate the music and composer more. Still, I listen to music and enjoy music.
In case of a Bruckner 5, well then I listen to music and no, I don't create any program in my inner eye. And I'll enjoy it as well, just for the music.
Quote from: Tapio Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on May 26, 2011, 07:58:42 AM
I first read about the "program music" 'problem' in a booklet from Beethovens 6th Symphony. Program music as some sort of intellectually weak concept, in its weakness only beaten by pop music.
Intellectually weak, maybe...but as I said above, the program causes no problem for me if it's simple (a mood, a scene). Beethoven 6 is a good example here. Something like "Erwachen heiterer Empfindungen bei der Ankunft auf dem Lande" doesn't get in the way of my enjoyment, because there's no action or drama involved.
QuoteI do not care. I rather like it if there's an underlying program. As e.g. in DSCH 11. Or Sibelius' Tone Poems. It's a helpful programmatic advice and there's still enough room for my phantasy. Finding all the coincidence between the music and the program makes me appreciate the music and composer more. Still, I listen to music and enjoy music.
Yes, a sensible approach. I
try to follow it, telling myself I don't need to know every little detail of the story.
For the record, it was exactly this sort of thing that Satie was wagging his nose at by marking his score with remarks such as "light as an egg" . . . .
Quote from: eyeresist on May 25, 2011, 06:32:39 PMFor me, the problem with program music is that it can disrupt the purely musical structure which I look for to make sense of the work.
I'm not sure I follow you. As someone who doesn't "understand" music, the term musical structure, to me, implies something objective, something apart from emotions or evocation of an image in your head, which you can identify. And, isn't it usually the composer's intention that the listener takes in the music along with the programme?
Maybe program music within instrumental music just fed people's instinctive need to explain why they react to music how they do. Didn't Romantics also look back on absolute music from the past and ascribe to it all kinds of story and description?
I was thinking about this topic last night, while listening to Schnittke's 1st symphony (twice! congratulate me).
The programmatic elements are the least successful parts of it, particularly the gestural wackiness of the 1st movement and the extended jazz improvisation of the 2nd. Presumably in this work Schnittke is "saying" something about music, but buggered if I can tell what it is just from listening. It helped to know (from the Bis liner notes) that the musical quotations relate in part to the Soviet banalisation of classical music by repeated use of excerpted arrangements at mass events, but only a little. It reminds me of Tom Wolfe's warning (in
The Painted Word) that in future the artwork would be merely a small illustration appended to the more important theoretical text.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 26, 2011, 07:20:25 AM
So, without being guided by something outside the triad: what does a C Major triad express?
Take your time, we've all day . . . .
A. Happiness and success.
Quote from: Florestan on May 25, 2011, 11:17:30 AM
Is it? If it weren't for the general and section titles, would you have been able to tell which particular 1,001 Nights story it depicts --- or even that it has anything to do with it at all?
I would be able to discern a storm, and probably a ship as well. The solo violin is pretty clearly representative of a human voice too. I hear car horns in Gershwin, Frost in Sibelius, donkeys in Grofe and a firecracker in Strauss. Not necessarily plotlines, but definite images.
Quote from: bigshot on May 26, 2011, 07:38:42 PM
I would be able to discern a storm, and probably a ship as well. The solo violin is pretty clearly representative of a human voice too.
Not to me, it's not.
I'll bore you with another thought. How did music begin? Perhaps by trying to imitate sounds of nature....
Quote from: eyeresist on May 26, 2011, 08:35:23 PM
Not to me, it's not.
The way the music transitions from the "story part" to the solo violin is exactly the same as a dissolve from an flashback scene to a narrator in a movie.
Quote from: starrynight on May 27, 2011, 10:36:39 AM
I'll bore you with another thought. How did music begin? Perhaps by trying to imitate sounds of nature....
Or perhaps by trying to express inner feelings...
If music tells a story then it is structured, that is - a story is a structure. The elements that may invoke sounds to illustrate the story are really no different from any other musical ideas and are often developed in much the same way. I find that in most cases the story can be observed or disregarded as the mood takes me. Scheherezade for example can be listened to simply as a symphonic suite. Other works such as Scriabin's Poem of Ecstasy and Prometheus are in sonata form anyway, so can be listened to as such.
A triad does not represent anything in and of itself, the same way that a few worlds isolated
from a poem don't convey its meaning.
Cave paintings were more representational though, so music may have been as well. The idea of art as something that reflects purely subjective aspects of an individual is more of a later idea, not that it wouldn't have had some influence in the expression of course.
Quote from: Superhorn on May 28, 2011, 06:21:47 AM
A triad does not represent anything in and of itself, the same way that a few worlds isolated
from a poem don't convey its meaning.
But as I said earlier rhythms maybe can, or perhaps a particular sequence of notes. And it's about the expression of the sound too. The basic building block of a note or a syllable are more abstract, but we don't interact with art on that level very often.
Mendelssohn's declared intention in composing the Midsummer Night's Dream Overture was to represent a dream. Like most dreams, its story if any is difficult to fathom but that does not detract from the music. He later wrote Overtures that stood alone without reference to an opera or stage work and there are also examples by various composers of Overtures without even a title. Here we have what is essentially program music without any context. One can only listen to the music.
Deryck Cooke (he of the Mahler 10 completion) wrote a book The Language of Music, in which he "argued that music is essentially a language of the emotions, and showed that composers throughout history had tended to choose the same musical phrases to express similar feelings or dramatic situations."
(Quote from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deryck_Cooke))
Quote from: Ten thumbs on June 02, 2011, 02:58:25 AM
Mendelssohn's declared intention in composing the Midsummer Night's Dream Overture was to represent a dream.
No. It was to musically represent Shakespeare's play, which has nothing to do with "a dream"
per se. :) .
Quote
He later wrote Overtures that stood alone without reference to an opera or stage work and there are also examples by various composers of Overtures without even a title. Here we have what is essentially program music without any context. One can only listen to the music.
Program music without a context? Rather oxymoronic, I should say. ;D
Quote from: eyeresist on June 02, 2011, 05:52:52 PM
Deryck Cooke (he of the Mahler 10 completion) wrote a book The Language of Music, in which he "argued that music is essentially a language of the emotions, and showed that composers throughout history had tended to choose the same musical phrases to express similar feelings or dramatic situations."
(Quote from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deryck_Cooke))
Sure, I pretty much buy that; but it doesn't alter the fact that a C Major triad of itself possesses no inherent expressive value. It's an observation on much the same order as, most European languages (and, as a result, some few non-European) use an indigenous phonetic equivalent to "beer"; the association of the meaning is thus a matter of widespread consensus and tradition — Lord knows it's no such romantic notion as that this magical sequence of phonemes "means"
Toga Party!!!!
Quote from: Ten thumbs on June 02, 2011, 02:58:25 AM
Mendelssohn's declared intention in composing the Midsummer Night's Dream Overture was to represent a dream. Like most dreams, its story if any is difficult to fathom but that does not detract from the music.
Of course, the difference is that a dream may be difficult to fathom, but there are still clearly perceived objects and persons. Even a dream is less abstract than music.
Quote from: Florestan on June 03, 2011, 02:01:09 AM
No. It was to musically represent Shakespeare's play, which has nothing to do with "a dream"per se. :) .
Program music without a context? Rather oxymoronic, I should say. ;D
Obviously you don't believe Mendelssohn's own words. Yes, it was meant to represent the play but he did say that it was written as dream music in the same sense as Traumerei, that is a dream sequence.
I should have said program music for which the context is not stated. My point was that the listener can either guess what the subject matter is or treat is as pure music.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 03, 2011, 03:41:09 AM
Sure, I pretty much buy that; but it doesn't alter the fact that a C Major triad of itself possesses no inherent expressive value. It's an observation on much the same order as, most European languages (and, as a result, some few non-European) use an indigenous phonetic equivalent to "beer"; the association of the meaning is thus a matter of widespread consensus and tradition — Lord knows it's no such romantic notion as that this magical sequence of phonemes "means" Toga Party!!!!
The major triad is not an accident. It is a combination of three musical tones in which the frequency relationships between the different notes are as simple as possible. Your ear cannot calculate frequency ratios, but it does register the fact that the overtone series of the three notes tend to match up with each other so that the notes blend together well. Other combinations of notes do not have these simple frequency relationships and have overtone series that don't line up and don't blend as well. They clash. They are more noisy than a simple triad. Although the rules of diatonic harmony are in some sense arbitrary they do take advantage of this contrast between clashing notes and blending notes. Dissonances are clashing combinations of notes that resolve to combinations of notes that blend better. The rules of diatonic harmony provide a well defined scheme where dissonances resolve so we can learn to anticipate and interpret these events.
Quote from: Leon on June 03, 2011, 02:09:15 PM
Dissonance is relative - a chord which sounds dissonant in one context can be made to sound consonant in another - dissonance is not defined by the physics of the harmonic array, but by the harmonies around it.
I do not claim harmony reduces to the mathematical relationships, only that it takes advantage of them.
Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on June 03, 2011, 02:13:10 PM
I do not claim harmony reduces to the mathematical relationships, only that it takes advantage of them.
Not to mention that major thirds were not always considered consonances.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 03, 2011, 03:41:09 AM
Sure, I pretty much buy that; but it doesn't alter the fact that a C Major triad of itself possesses no inherent expressive value.
Absolutely, I wouldn't try to argue that. For one thing, there is the matter of tuning pitches changing over time! Any meaning must derive from
context.
Garh. I meant musical context, not program context.
I don't know if anyone mentioned this but 'music' in a loose sense probably started before language, sounds were most likely made to try and signify things.