simonxwise at hotmail.com
Thu Nov 22 02:51:06 CET 2007
On 21 Nov 2007, at 3:47 AM, Kyle Klipowicz wrote:
> You can get lost in the mathematics and never be able to communicate
> with an audience of anyone but geeks (self included). Music is
> communication, so as musicians we have a responsibility to communicate
> in a language that is understood by our audiences.
> Of course, if you want to be bitter and elitist and feel that the
> audience needs to take a complex analysis class to 'get' your
> music...but the ladies still dance more to a hard hitting beat or a
> good ol' melody.
The structures that that underlie a good piece of work don't need to
be understood on a direct analytical level by an audience member,
formal structures - mathematical or otherwise - can often help create
a work that is more whole and reads better regardless of whether that
structure is read directly (if an individual audience member also
understands the structure this can add another kind of interest to
the work for them).
On the other hand it is very important for the artist using formal
structures in their work to understand what they are doing. It
certainly isn't the only way to make art, but if you are going to go
that way then understanding the structures you could use is crucial.
And work that is more purely formal, intended only for an audience
with a knowledge of and interest in the structures being used, isn't
only for the 'bitter and elitist' artist - it is also part of the way
artists can share and build techniques, a way to 'talk about'
structure and form in a more practical way, perhaps in parallel with
formal analysis, perhaps not.
This feeds into work for a broader audience and helps the artist and
others understand what is going on in their practice.
More information about the Pd-list