Is classical music merely self-aggrandizing?

[karlhenning]

It feels profound, no doubt, it is beautiful, no doubt, it does of course speak to us in ways in which words cannot describe, but the question becomes, why do we choose to experience that over another pleasure?

No one simple answer.  (1)  Partly, because of the nature of the pleasure, which is otherwise than other pleasures.  (2)  Partly, because of the nature of art music, that while what we experience in listening to it is always pleasure, listening to even the same recording is never exactly the same, twice.  (3)  Choosing this pleasure over others, is a momentary thing;  none of of receives our entire 'allotment' of pleasure from music.

"Self-aggrandizement" need never enter any of these considerations.

[Michel]

You're a fucking comedian!

I am, but my point is not meant to be funny. If I am wrong, could someone explain why we do this (book over a playstation?) I genuinly interested.

Enjoyment is of course not an answer, because that is an effect not a cause; after all, self-aggrandizement is enjoyable.

[Que]

Someone by the name of Don on this forum once said that he barely listened to anything besides Bach's organ music for 2 years; no normal person could ever do this, only the self-obsessed, egotistical intellectual elitist, who probably isn't actually that clever, hence having a greater need for self-aggrandizement.

I have experienced the same thing with Bach's cantatas, some 15 years ago, great works of art can have that effect.
Btw, I think Don took this twisted remark like a gentleman....chapeau.

Q

[71 dB]

Someone by the name of Don on this forum once said that they barely listened to anything besides Bach's organ music for 2 years; no normal person could ever do this, only the self-obsessed, egotistical intellectual elitist, who probably isn't actually that clever, hence having a greater need for self-aggrandizement.

"Normal" people suck. Music taste of an average person on this planet is insanely bad and for the most part controlled by business related activity in media. Listening to Bach's organ music is not a sign of self-aggrandizement.

Why do we listen to this music? I love it, most of the time. But I do still feel guilty that I am engaging in something pretentious and insincere on occasion.

The superficial reality around you makes you feel that way. I feel my music reality is totally different from the majority of people but I don't care. They are idiots. They will never find Buxtehude's cantatas. I did. So, why should I feel bad about it?

[karlhenning]

"Normal" people suck.

That's odd.  They always speak highly of you.

[Mark]

Okay, less busy. Here goes:

In all seriousness, what goes through our head when we listen to something either from the ivory, upper class tower of baroque music, or the tormented, quasi intellectual sounds of the romantic period?

Seriously, what do you mean by the parts I've emboldened above? Until I understand what you're driving at, I can't answer this.

What do we get from it? How many of us listen to it because it merely reinforces our desired identity? (ie. someone clever?)

I understand your point about intellectual snobbery, and this may certainly be true of some 'listeners'. I doubt such applies to anyone who posts here.

How many of us, if we are honest, can admit that objectively, there is no difference between Beethoven and the Beatles, but only our subjective response to it and interpretation of its relative importance in history?

Beethoven was critical to the evolution of Western Art Music, The Beatles were influential to Western Popular Music. I see no case here to answer.

Why do we constantly explore new classical artists and revisit those we've previously not liked yet not once go to the Heavy Metal section of the CD shop and ask ourselves, I must learn to understand what Metallica were hoping to do... I don't like them but they are objectively great....Why do we give classical composers such a monopoly over greatness - why are we so forgiving in their mistakes? Why can we not slag them off?

Metallica rock, dude! So do loads of other bands in their (and many other) genre. I've got no beef with buying a rock album if I fancy it, and if I think it's great (relative to other rock albums), I'll award it the status of greatness. As will many others. I don't try to compare Albinoni with Anthrax: you can't make such ridiculous comparisons, they're totally different. And I have slagged off classical composers. Berg, to name just one. But with maturity comes new perspective, and as you say, we revisit. I rather like Berg now.

One possible answer is that we do all this because we want a piece of their legitimacy - a piece of their reputation and intelligence so that when people ask what you listen to, you tell them Brahms and you expect a certain response, you get pigeoned in the "clever" category, a category you'd like to broadcast.

Firstly, nonsense. I couldn't care less about ANYONE's legitimacy (whatever that means). And their reputation is theirs, not mine. As for intelligence, that's also exclusively theirs. Someone may be an intellectual equal of another, but these two people are still possessed of their own intelligences.

Secondly, and as I've said already, intellectual posturing and snobbery may be the delight of some, but I don't think it applies to most folks at GMG.

And when you listen to it, you think you are getting nourished with the same genius that wrote it.

Not with the genius that wrote, but by that genuis.

I don't think that the concept of identity can be overemphasized when considering why we choose to do certain things, and I think that classical music is a self-aggrandizing activity for this reason. Someone by the name of Don on this forum once said that they barely listened to anything besides Bach's organ music for 2 years; no normal person could ever do this, only the self-obsessed, egotistical intellectual elitist, who probably isn't actually that clever, hence having a greater need for self-aggrandizement.

Don's dealt with this. I'm moving on ...

I suppose this thought could be applied to all art, in the sense that any creation is by definition insincere, since it is for the consumption of others and why would you want to create something, for example, as a result of a very personal experience, to be consumed by others? To me, it just seems crass. If my children died, the last thing I would want to do is write a poem or piece of music about it.

You're making some fundamental mistakes, here. Chief among them, the idea that art is merely for consumption. It is not. Art is a response to life (and death). Thus, it could be triggered by any of the events of life ... or by death. It's a way for those who are able to communicate artistically to give form to their thoughts, their emotions. If, later, such works strike chords with others, and these others are willing to pay to hear/see/read said works, then why not? My child died. If I am not to join them, I'd better eat. The money others give me will ensure I can.

Therefore, if we take for a minute that this is the case, that music is all "fake", then why do we want to hear it? Is it a tool, however unreal, that is pleasant and clever that just plays with our emotions? But if that is the case, why do we in the first instance consider ourself emotional beings, capable of that profundity? Why do we listen to Mahler, and think we as inidviduals are intelligent enough to interpret it? And by this I mean not unlocking a secret code that requires brainpower, but the understanding that you yourself understand emotions and feelings to a level were you can respond and relate to something very complex.

If you want to talk about profundity, make at least a cursory (and ideally, an in-depth) study of world philosophies and even metaphysical literature. There's too much to expound upon here, but let me tell you that you may end up viewing what humans are and are not very differently with the benefit of greater reading and contemplation.

Why do we listen to this music? I love it, most of the time.

You ask a question. Then you answer it. You are thinking aloud.

But I do still feel guilty that I am engaging in something pretentious and insincere on occasion.

Don has also dealt adequately with this.

[Don]

I am, but my point is not meant to be funny. If I am wrong, could someone explain why we do this (book over a playstation?) I genuinly interested.

Why do you keep bringing up "playstation"?  You sound like my 11 year old grandson.

[BachQ]

You're making some fundamental mistakes, here.

Testify, brother ..........

[Larry Rinkel]

In all seriousness, what goes through our head when we listen to something either from the ivory, upper class tower of baroque music, or the tormented, quasi intellectual sounds of the romantic period?

What do we get from it? How many of us listen to it because it merely reinforces our desired identity? (ie. someone clever?)Why do we listen to this music? I love it, most of the time. But I do still feel guilty that I am engaging in something pretentious and insincere on occasion.

Unlike some of the others, I think you're hitting on something valid. Do we love music because we love it, or because it makes us feel we are part of an elite that rises above the common herd? Or is it a combination of both? But if it genuinely touches or excites you in ways that other experiences do not, isn't that answer enough?

[71 dB]

That's odd.  They always speak highly of you.

Normal people do not speak about me. Members of this forum aren't normal when it comes to music taste.

[karlhenning]

Anyway, luckily for you, you are just so much better than normal people.

[Mark]

Do we love music because we love it, or because it makes us feel we are part of an elite that rises above the common herd? Or is it a combination of both? But if it genuinely touches or excites you in ways that other experiences do not, isn't that answer enough?

Yes, I'd say you're right here, on both counts. Some like the elitist feeling of belonging to something (in this case, the minority who listen to classical music) not readily accepted by 'the masses'. When I was younger, I'm sure I felt an element of that, too. But no longer.

What one might argue, is that by starting this thread, Michel himself is indulging in a little self-aggrandising ...

[71 dB]

Anyway, luckily for you, you are just so much better than normal people.

No, I'm not Karl. I have a very good taste and undertanding of music but I really suck in many things. For example, I am a total idiot in formal social situations. 

[Tancata]

Yes, there's definitely an interesting question in the original post as Larry says above.

But, the real question is whether it's mainly or exclusively classical music to which this applies.

Incredibly obviously, it isn't.

If it bothers you that people may have various motives for liking classical music, good luck finding a "purer" form of music to listen to! All art has baggage.

Metal, punk, indie, folk, jazz, blues, 60s pop or the hippest of the hip modern bands: fans of any music (really, of anything...) can be snobs  .  It's perfectly natural and not harmful unless its blown out of all proportion. After all, punks DO know more about the Dead Kennedys, the people here DO know more about Mahler, &c &c.

Ever met a Tool fan? 

There's also an unrelated aspect to consider.

Do you always get a positive reaction from a new acquaintance when you say you like classical music? It can easily put an end to discussions about shared interests in other genres. There's a stuffy, backward image to go along with your self-aggrandizement. At least, that's my experience.

[karlhenning]

Yes, I'd say you're right here, on both counts. Some like the elitist feeling of belonging to something (in this case, the minority who listen to classical music) not readily accepted by 'the masses'.

Then too, there is that internal-contradictory pinkharpian strain, which both thinks highly of itself for appreciating something above ' the masses,' yet wishes to assert the artistic superiority if its preferred music, at the same time, by imagining it to possess universal appeal . . . .

[Kullervo]

Do you always get a positive reaction from a new acquaintance when you say you like classical music? It can easily put an end to discussions about shared interests in other genres. At least, that's my experience.

Same here. After I mention that I listen mostly to classical music, they grow strangely quiet.

[Scriptavolant]

Yes a lot of people listen to classical music with the only aim of self-aggrandizing. Pure and simple. I think the OP is quite acute and inquiring, indeed.
Personally, I don't listen to classical music to look for emotional swoon, or religious exctasy or even immediate pleasure. At least, I think all these dimensions should be achieved thoughout an hard work, a profound investigation of the musical matter.
I listen to classical music because I'm curious of artistic/intellectual human achievements. I always expect to learn something from that.

[karlhenning]

I listen to classical music because I'm curious of artistic/intellectual human achievements. I always expect to learn something from that.

Seeking culture out, because you expect to better yourself thereby, is one thing. "Self-aggrandizement" is quite another.

[Michel]

Seeking culture out, because you expect to better yourself thereby, is one thing. "Self-aggrandizement" is quite another.

But you seek a culture out (this one) because you deem it more important than another. Why does your self do this?

[Don]

Yes a lot of people listen to classical music with the only aim of self-aggrandizing. Pure and simple.

That would be pathetic.  Any evidence to support the above?