Here's something you might be interested in.
You may need a shovel for this one because it could get deep.
"Music is thus by no means like the other arts, the copy of the Ideas, but the copy of the will itself, whose objectivity these Ideas are. This is why the effect of music is much more powerful and penetrating than that of the other arts, for they speak only of shadows, but it speaks of the thing itself." — Schopenhauer
Totally.
Here's the deal with Schopenhauer and almost every other philosopher before Wittgenstein. They were obsessed with discovering the "truth in itself" instead of the representation of truth in physical objects.
While Schopenhauer failed to provide evidence of objective truth, his philosophizing gives us a unique perspective on music.
Art forms such as architecture, sculpture, or painting represent specific ideas that the artist is communicating. Music is different.
"Music does not express this or that particular and definite joy, this or that sorrow, or pain, or horror, or delight, or merriment, or peace of mind; but joy, sorrow, pain, horror, delight, merriment, peace of mind themselves, to a certain extent in the abstract, their essential nature, without accessories, and therefore without their motives. Yet we completely understand them in this extracted quintessence. Hence it arises that our imagination is so easily excited by music, and now seeks to give form to that invisible yet actively moved spirit world which speaks to us directly, and to clothe it with flesh and blood, i. e. to embody it in an analogous example. This is the origin of the song with words, and finally of the opera, the text of which should therefore never forsake that subordinate position in order to make itself the chief thing and the music the mere means of expressing it,..."
What does Beethoven's Fifth Symphony mean? What is the value of the key of E flat? It is impossible to say.
Music comes to us with ideas and emotions that are completely abstract. In one sense it is ridiculous to say that music sounds painful or happy. When have we ever experienced pain and had a look of A sharp on our face?
On the other hand, Schopenhauer points out that we "completely understand them [the emotions of music] in this extracted quintessence."
In case your wondering, the last section of Schopenhauer's quote was taken up by Wagner with a vengeance. It could be said that this idea made Wagner.
In Wagner's operas he elevates the music above the text. This is why the story moves so slowly in a Wagnerian production. The primary story is happening in the pit not on the stage. If we haven't explored Schopenhauer, Wagner is doomed to sound ponderous and his characters will appear misguided.
Tristan und Isolde was Wagner's first attempt at realizing Schopenhauer's philosophy.
By bringing Schopenhauer into play, we can listen to and experience music with an ear inclined toward, "...the spirit world which speaks to us directly..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5ILG8OctGg&feature=related
You may need a shovel for this one because it could get deep.
"Music is thus by no means like the other arts, the copy of the Ideas, but the copy of the will itself, whose objectivity these Ideas are. This is why the effect of music is much more powerful and penetrating than that of the other arts, for they speak only of shadows, but it speaks of the thing itself." — Schopenhauer
Totally.
Here's the deal with Schopenhauer and almost every other philosopher before Wittgenstein. They were obsessed with discovering the "truth in itself" instead of the representation of truth in physical objects.
While Schopenhauer failed to provide evidence of objective truth, his philosophizing gives us a unique perspective on music.
Art forms such as architecture, sculpture, or painting represent specific ideas that the artist is communicating. Music is different.
"Music does not express this or that particular and definite joy, this or that sorrow, or pain, or horror, or delight, or merriment, or peace of mind; but joy, sorrow, pain, horror, delight, merriment, peace of mind themselves, to a certain extent in the abstract, their essential nature, without accessories, and therefore without their motives. Yet we completely understand them in this extracted quintessence. Hence it arises that our imagination is so easily excited by music, and now seeks to give form to that invisible yet actively moved spirit world which speaks to us directly, and to clothe it with flesh and blood, i. e. to embody it in an analogous example. This is the origin of the song with words, and finally of the opera, the text of which should therefore never forsake that subordinate position in order to make itself the chief thing and the music the mere means of expressing it,..."
What does Beethoven's Fifth Symphony mean? What is the value of the key of E flat? It is impossible to say.
Music comes to us with ideas and emotions that are completely abstract. In one sense it is ridiculous to say that music sounds painful or happy. When have we ever experienced pain and had a look of A sharp on our face?
On the other hand, Schopenhauer points out that we "completely understand them [the emotions of music] in this extracted quintessence."
In case your wondering, the last section of Schopenhauer's quote was taken up by Wagner with a vengeance. It could be said that this idea made Wagner.
In Wagner's operas he elevates the music above the text. This is why the story moves so slowly in a Wagnerian production. The primary story is happening in the pit not on the stage. If we haven't explored Schopenhauer, Wagner is doomed to sound ponderous and his characters will appear misguided.
Tristan und Isolde was Wagner's first attempt at realizing Schopenhauer's philosophy.
By bringing Schopenhauer into play, we can listen to and experience music with an ear inclined toward, "...the spirit world which speaks to us directly..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5ILG8OctGg&feature=related