Started by mikkeljs, October 20, 2012, 07:39:41 AM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: mikkeljs on October 21, 2012, 10:29:55 AMI will take that as a big fat no. But why?
Quote from: mc ukrneal on October 21, 2012, 10:42:05 AMWhat is a theosophical compose?
Quote from: Corey on October 21, 2012, 10:43:05 AMThere aren't any because it's a fad pseudo-religion that hasn't been popular since the 1920s.
Quote from: Corey on October 21, 2012, 11:45:13 AMI guess I just don't understand the need for theosophy when there are plenty of philosophers past and present who have explored similar territory in more thorough ways, with less of an overt occultism. My suggestion: read Descartes, Spinoza, Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, et. al. for thinkers who connected art and metaphysics.
Quote from: sanantonio on October 21, 2012, 12:21:19 PMNot a composer, but W.B. Yeats was heavily into theosophy. There might be some like-minded composers among his milieu, but I can't think of any.
Quote from: mikkeljs on October 21, 2012, 01:15:14 PMI like to read philosophers too, but thats pretty much the same path, isnt it? My impression is also that many young composers today and the composition education lacks philosophy and many have very limitted abstraction skills on their theoretical knowledge. The same thing is true for many contemporary artists in other fields than music too.I havent yet read even a substantial portion of ISIS UNVEILED, but it seem to be so concentrated material, so much substance, whereas many philosophers tend to be quite repetitive. Theosophy is no more occult than algebra, but yes when it was introduced back in the late 18th century, ideas like radiation, parrallel universes and their geometry, extra dimensions, evolution as part of gravity etc., would probably have sounded a bit occult at that time. I myself am quite a big admire of UG Krishnamurti and Jed McKenna, if you know them. They are known to be the exact opposite of this theosophical mentality, but everything we read depends upon our own understanding, and surely theosophy, like all the religions, have been severely misused by the new age culture and Hitler. Yet theosophy is what makes most sense to me.
Quote from: some guy on October 21, 2012, 01:21:19 PMI don't understand what you'd have if you had a list of "theosophical" composers.I found references to Mahler and Sibelius, too, along with Scriabin.Mahler and Sibelius are often seen as antithetical in many ways, not the least in how they view the purpose of the symphony.But that aside, does theosophy help one decide which pitch or which sound comes next? Which pitches or sounds to put together to sound at the same time? Whether to make a dotted quarter and an eighth note in 4 or a quarter and an eighth in 6? Whether to determine things or leave things to chance?I can see Zen having some effect on the latter question--or, I know of at least one example of that. Though I also think in that case that the mind that was drawn to indeterminacy was drawn to Zen for the same reasons, not that Zen influenced that person to compose indeterminate music.Anyway, I expect to see threads on Catholic composers and on Protestant ones. On the relative merits of Baptist composers and Methodist ones. Or even Baptist and Southern Baptist and Seventh-day Baptist. (Who ARE the Seventh-day Baptist composers?)
Quote from: Corey on October 21, 2012, 03:53:20 PMI just don't see the necessity of it. Religious beliefs seem to arise, in instances where religious beliefs are seriously considered rather than unquestioningly accepted, out of a specific need. One can view their beliefs as the end result of a personal logic, but William James would say there's a jump from reason into faith, where reason fails. Which is why I can't give myself to any religion fully as it seems like the move into faith implies a hidden store of incontrovertible facts to which we don't have access, rather than viewing the universe as something continually revealed to us in our search for "truth" (if that is possible). From that it follows that theosophy is claiming to have knowledge of things not knowable, which is self-negating. If those are not its claims, why call it a religion?Another issue is that, whatever truth value the beliefs a religion might have, any organized religion will inevitably become the ground of power struggles which are only valid within the circumscribed realm of the organization, and can be dangerous for the credulous people who fall into them seeking sympathy or belonging (especially in cults like Adidam which actually are dangerous). Even Buddhism, for which I have deep respect for many of its facets, is not immune from this. One need only look at the Soka Gakkai and the cult of personality built up around Daisaku Ikeda for an example of this.
Quote from: mikkeljs on October 21, 2012, 05:47:26 PMAs a matter of fact, Im asking because Im looking for someone to study with.
Page created in 0.031 seconds with 26 queries.