Music/Art

[Lucas Bleicher <bleicher@who.net>]

I've been reading this for some time and didn't make a comment on it,
but now seems to be a good
moment to do it. McGow seems to have few knowledge on music, although
his knowledge on poetry
is no doubt.

Well, McGow, here's the problem: It's not music that's just
entertainment, the fact is that
entertainment is what you are looking for in music. Your assumption is
just like saying that
literature as a whole is just entertainment, just because there is
plenty of crap on bookstores
out there. The same applies to music: Although you will surely find just
entertainment in most
songs that are playing on the radio, you could find good art in music if
you did care to look
for it. I understand it pretty well, because I don't look for art in
poetry, but I do in music.
Well, I think the first important artist in music was J. S. Bach. Bach
was a master when it comes
to counterpoint and harmonies, that, to me, have the same importance
that, for example, metaphors
and imagery have to you. Well, that was the baroque era. The classical
era started with names as
Vivaldi. Vivaldi's "Four Seasons" are not very complex. Well, that was
just the beggining. But
listen to Beethoven's 9th symphony (I mean, ALL of it). Listen to
Schubert's 8th symphony
(the "unfinished"). I'm still in the XIX century, and I hope you agree
with me that music is
art, not less than poetry. But let me continue. Well, you said your
musician friend told you
that music didn't evolve very much. Well, in this century we had a guy
named Bella Bartók.
Bartok merged his classical influences (as Wagner) with the folk music
of his country, Hungary,
creating an unique form of music. He was probably one of the greatest
composers of the XX
century, and I advise you to listen to his piano songs and concertos.
The only problem of
classical music was: You just couldn't change it much after it was
written. Of course a symphony
will sound different when conducted by different people, but it wasn't
such a difference. Then
came the Jazz. And it made quite a difference. Now musicians could
improvise using different
keys in the same song, and they invented the so-called "swing", which
consisted in playing
"around" the beats of the bar, which gave a great variety on tempo (and
the tempos used were
also different from the common ones, composite tempos being also
common). Well,
your friend said music hasn't changed much? I have to say he's wrong.
Well, the blues also
developed along with jazz, and although it wasn't so complex (most of it
had the famous
12-bar structure), it's a musical genre who had great instrumentists.
Artists, for that matter.
Well, then rock appeared, on the 50's. If you say THAT rock is just pure
entertainment, I won't argue
with that. It is. 50's rock wasn't very complex. I have a Chuck Berry
album in which he starts
more than 50% of the songs exactly the same way and almost all of them
had the same harmonic
structure, the 12-bar. Well, rock started to evolve in the 60's.
Blues-rock and Jazz-rock were
starting to appear. Musicians were trying to merge the good
characteristics of each musical genre
and make something new. What is called "progressive rock" started there,
in the end of the 60's.
Although "prog-rock" involved different kinds of music, we could
describe it by some major
characteristics: Appropriation of structures and characteristics of
music styles such as
baroque, classical, medieval, jazz, folk, etc; A variety of rhythms,
tones and keys in the
same composition, which lead to more complex songs; Free use of musical
instruments (not only
the archetypal guitar-bass-drums line-up, but also pianos, flutes,
violins, cellos,
synthesyzers and so on). Well, listen to Gentle Giant, Renaissance, ELP,
UK, and tons of other
bands, you will find great examples of good art. Well, you said once
that rock hasn't evolved.
I know it's wrong, but I understand very well the reason of your
assumption: Some time ago I
also thought that no good music was being done nowadays. I was wrong,
and I'll explain what
happens. Entertainment makes money. Don't expect the radios or MTV to
play obscure bands who
make their good art. But they exist. You probably never heard strange
names such as Pär Lindh
Project, Änglagård or Anekdoten. Well, these are bands from the 90's
that are doing a very good
job. And this proves that your friend was wrong and, yes, music is still
evolving, although
the media will just show entertainment.

Well, maybe you won't get into Schubert and Gentle Giant (just like some
people don't get into
Emily Dickinson), because you don't seem to aprecciate music (you just
look for entertainment
on it), but the reason I wrote all this is to say that music isn't
inferior to poetry
when it comes to art, and to say that your musician friend was wrong. Of
course there's 
literature for entertainment and music for entertainment, but you will
find plenty of art on
both if you look for it. Well, sorry if I spelled something wrong or
made any language mistake.
English is not my mother tongue.