Conditions for vigorous, innovative art ambience ?

Re: Conditions for vigorous, innovative art ambience ?
Hi Vivien,

Vivien wrote:

group art from all I've seen produces mediocrity

Firstly that is driving with the rear view mirrors, not what the future may bring. Secondly I did not say collaboration of different artists from different disciplines (as I gather you mean). I said "integration" and that is an entirely different thing than collaboration. "Integration" means the forms are no longer separate and there is in fact no implied collaboration. Technologies will help this come about. Further I contest your view that the collaborations (as I gather you mean) "produces mediocrity". If you do not believe me go see a top notch rock band of your choosing, you may well see many artists from many disciplines working together very successfully, and yes sound engineering is an art, as is lighting, clothing, stage production, theatrics, etc.

Vivien wrote:

Ballet is not a group thing except in performance, as is all music apart from a solo singer, playing an instrument themselves with no backing or a caplella (?sp)

As far as my reference to ballet you are again using a word I did use nor imply that being "group' I used the example of ballet to set the thought processes in motion to suggest the integration of the visual and aural. As far as your claim that music is not a group creative experience (which I gather you are inferring) it appears you have never played with a group a good musicians in an open improvisational setting.

Vivien wrote:

The composer works alone and the choreographer works out the moves - not individual or group dancers.

See above

Vivien wrote:

There are rare partnerships who produce paintings together, there's the Chapman brothers here and a twins, whose name I forget. Other than that art is a very individual thing.

I whole heatedly disagree that art is a "very individual thing" that is a *relatively* recent construct. In fact the future of art may well belong to those who not only integrate various forms but to those who can make it a gestalt so there is no clear definition between the artist, the art, and the audience.

Cheers,

Chum

PS: And don't go telling me gestalt art has already been tried and failed as technologies and imagination can change all that - at least that's one of the premises I initially put forward, with the caveat here that I am in not suggesting dogmatism.

0 Replies

I agree that "true" art (as in the case of art music) is a very individualistic thing. Imagine Beethoven composing WITH someone else, or Francescati playing Beethoven's violin concerto WITH Milstein (each playing the same notes). Or, equally unlikely, Matisse and Picasso painting a masterpiece TOGETHER.
Chumly, it seems you are talking about popular or recreational (not art) music and musicians. If that is so, I agree that in that context "integration" among individuals is essential in a sense not quite like that of a symphony orchestra. Popular musicians enjoy much more lattitude than do symphony members. And the level of technical competence in popular music suggests that in most cases each musician sounds not to good by himself (e.g., compare the sounds of Laurence Welk's violins to that of a violin section of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra).
I'm sorry to be such an "elitist", but popular music is NOT QUITE "art" in my book; it is recreational sound-making, designed to invoke our less "spiritual" impulses. Nothing wrong--in most cases--with that but not art, nevertheless. The exception is American jazz which I think of as an art form, but one that is not always performed artistically.
Finally, if this is driving with my rear-view mirrors, I dread what the future brings.

0 Replies

Hi JLNobody,

I don't have the time to address your points individually, I wish I did Sad

All I will say is you're completely wrong and I am completely right naaaaaaaaa....................................kidding

Remember though, I prefaced my post with the precept as taken from the original thread starter: "What does this portend? Where are we headed?"

0 Replies

Aha, but Beethoven wasn't composing in a void -- the unmistakable extrapolation of the Mozart "Jupiter" symphony in particular and the late Haydn symphonies are very apparant in the first three symphonies and not completely ignored in all six of the opuses. Even Lawrence Welk could have studied, say, a Haydn Symphony and coaxed his players to perform a chamber rendition. I wouldn't exactly compare that to, say, Sir Charles Mackerras conducting an original instrument rendition of the same music but it's still quite possible if you didn't know who was playing the works that the listening experience would not be unpleasant.

Ballet or even film as collaborative arts are not comparable to the creation of an individual canvas which came out of the head of one painter. However, from cave painting to Keith Haring, the influence of a painter on the next generation of painters is also unmistakable.

As close as Jasper Johns was to Robert Rauschenberg, there are not collaborative canvases I can think of but the closeness of their style and technique cannot be ignored (okay, I don't mean to infer sexually but Laughing

)

0 Replies

(Maybe it's time for a film about the two painters, "Brokeback Studio?")

0 Replies

(Can't edited it now, but that should be "all six of the remaining opuses).

0 Replies

Thoughts are flowing this morning, so I would also point out another comparison in Shostokovitch and Popov, two Russian compers who appear to have been working hand-in-hand with, of course, one of them becoming quite famous and the other relegated to only a few new CD's. I'm being subjective and have no idea if there was any physical intimacy there.

0 Replies

JLNobody wrote:

I agree that "true" art (as in the case of art music) is a very individualistic thing. Imagine Beethoven composing WITH someone else, or Francescati playing Beethoven's violin concerto WITH Milstein (each playing the same notes). Or, equally unlikely, Matisse and Picasso painting a masterpiece TOGETHER.
Chumly, it seems you are talking about popular or recreational (not art) music and musicians. If that is so, I agree that in that context "integration" among individuals is essential in a sense not quite like that of a symphony orchestra. Popular musicians enjoy much more lattitude than do symphony members. And the level of technical competence in popular music suggests that in most cases each musician sounds not to good by himself (e.g., compare the sounds of Laurence Welk's violins to that of a violin section of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra).
I'm sorry to be such an "elitist", but popular music is NOT QUITE "art" in my book; it is recreational sound-making, designed to invoke our less "spiritual" impulses. Nothing wrong--in most cases--with that but not art, nevertheless. The exception is American jazz which I think of as an art form, but one that is not always performed artistically.
Finally, if this is driving with my rear-view mirrors, I dread what the future brings.

You appear to be giving far too much credit to the musicianship of the individual orchestra members many of whom cannot improvise well (for example). They are good musicians in the sense that can read and play well, but they are in essence, human sequencers.

You are appear to not be giving anywhere near the credence to bands like ELP and Yes and Genesis and Zappa et al vis a vis improvisational skills let alone musicianship and compositional skills.

Also your reference to the musicians in Welk's band is off base, as he has had some truly first class musicians irrelative of the style they may play within the context of his program.

You appear to also believe that simply because some styles are more immediately accessible such as folk or blues or bluegrass or rock that they constitute a lesser art form, and that is simply not so. FWIW there is a load of poor compositional music as well as marginal orchestras.

As a working musician I can tell you that the ability to improvise well is not the sole domain of what you call "American Jazz" by any stretch.

I also contend that improvisational music, in it's many forms, has just as much artistic validity as the traditional orchestral compositional music, I gather you hold to such a high standard.

I could go on lots more about the idealized myth of the sole artist and his "independent" creations butsuffice it to say:

"nothing from nothing means nothing"

I do hope you take my oh-so-graceful counterpoints in a Chummy spirit Smile

0 Replies

lets all listen to some music by John Cage .

0 Replies

FM, like his Four minute thirty three second piano sonata?

Chumly, I am a violinist who can, I think, compare the playing of a Welk performer to that of a CSO performer. I agree that many pop musicians are well trained. My father was a "classical" violinists who chose, not without regrets, to make his living as a popular musician, playing and arranging for many major big bands of the 40 and 50s. I know he would agree with most of what I said here.
I enjoy the improvizations of most jazz musicians but must say that those of most pop musicians I've heard seem more like slack that's built into weakly written music. Compare the "sensational" playing of the drummer of a pop group with that of a symphonic tympanist. Unless the drummer is a serious tympanist moonlighting, the difference will be stark.
I would compare good "modern" (abstract and semi-abstract) art to the jazz musician, but the pop musician to a cartoonist. For the most part, that is. And I've got nothing against cartoonist, but I don't have the time for their work, for the most part, that is.

0 Replies

High, Wizard. Good to hear from you. I'm told that the sheep on brokeback mountain are saying "Phew."

0 Replies

Hi JLSomebody,

My gramps played violin in the Toronto Symphony Orchestra for his entire long career, and he would take more my side, so there!

But seriously, we are refining our arguments to a point, that while certainly interesting, is rather removed from my initial premise of future artistic perspectives.

Of course you are welcome to your views about who you think should hold valid artistic license, and whether complexity, or executable skills, can be equated with, or is proportional to artistic expression, and what styles of music constitute art, and to what degree (even if you are a rather stuffy highbrow hee hee).

I do think however that when it comes to certain styles, and musicians etc. you seem to be making generalizations about specifics.

I think, at least we can agree, that luckily licenses are not available at the Motor Vehicle Branch!

0 Replies

Chummy wisdom here-

Quote:

I think, at least we can agree, that luckily licenses are not available at the Motor Vehicle Branch!

0 Replies

I would not go as far as saying it constitutes any form of wisdom on my part, given it's intent as humor, but if you wish to perceive it as such, it may perhaps be of some personal benefit to your artistic goals.

0 Replies

Chum-

I have no artistic goals.I just thought you made a brilliant connection.A neat way of saying that Art's Council Grants are a dead hand on art.A poetic touch.Maybe if in Vancouver you don't have such things I understand why you might not see what I saw in it.But beauty is in the eye of the beholder I think.

There was a big row here once when the ACG came in.

And I'm one of those who don't like ACGs.So natch I would think it wisdom.

0 Replies

Oh, I did not make the connection, great touch!

If you think you have problems, Vancouver is like a different planet in some ways. Everything here is way more socialized inclusive of the arts, even auto insurance is state owned. (wink wink)

I agree with you about the use of tax payer's dollars.

0 Replies

JLNobody wrote:

High, Wizard. Good to hear from you. I'm told that the sheep on brokeback mountain are saying "Phew."

Okay, confess you heard that on Leno. Laughing

And, no I'm not "high." Although a few glasses of Pinot Noir sounds really good right now.

Yes, many musicians in popular music or jazz orchestras are actually borrowed from neighboring symphony orchestras. They get paid more. A lot of Hollywood soundtracks are actually the Los Angeles Symphony Orchestra and often uncredited. One of the more notable collaborations was Andy Warhol and Jean Michael Basquiet. I had always liked to have seen Keith Haring and Kenny Scharf produce some collaborative work but not to sure how their styles could possible meld. Scharf is probably too sureal.

I believe the De Kooning's produced some collaborative work but I've not researched it.

Visual fine arts such as painting and sculpture are not traditionally collaborative but we all know Raphael had a lot of assistance with his frescos but nobody ever expected Michaelangelo to reveal that he did have assistance for at least the Sistine Chapel. I think they both likely informed their benfactors, the church and the Pope, that they would prefer it wasn't know.

Opera, ballet and the majority of musical arts are all collaborative. A classical piece comes out of the written page as interpreted by a conductor and played by multiple talents.

I also vaguely remember Duchamp and Man Ray producing some collaborative work.

0 Replies

I agree, Chumly, we are talking about tastes. I prefer highbrow to lowbrow, the vast majority of the time. And I'd prefer highbrow Satchmo to mediumbrow John Williams any time.

Wiz: Duchamp and May Ray? Hmmm. Was it done safely?
I just finished reading Stevens and Swan's bio on deKooning. I don't remember any collaborations mentioned once he got to the U.S. In the Netherlands, yes--in the commercial art shops where he worked.

Leno? No, I made it up.

eh, eh.

0 Replies

You're right about Williams, but I would say that Satchmo transcends our categories.

I very much appreciate your "preference-less and mood-specific self characterization. I wish I could claim that. Sounds very "zen."

0 Replies

Really ace folks.I love this sort of stuff.You never know with it.
******************************************
Chum wrote-

Quote:

I agree with you about the use of tax payer's dollars.

At the time of the big row in Parliament Punch produced a cartoon which showed about 8 very burly and macho Morris Dancers in full effeminate irony kit sat at a table outside a traditional rural pub which was full of empty pint glasses.

The chairman,half smoked fag in mouth,is shown as saying-

"Well lads,what 'ave we to do wi rest o't art's council grant,"

0 Replies

Conditions for vigorous, innovative art ambience ?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know