Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site tekecs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!tekecs!jeffw
From: jeffw@tekecs.UUCP (Jeff Winslow)
Newsgroups: net.music
Subject: Re: Music Kritics
Message-ID: <5313@tekecs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 10-May-85 16:56:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: tekecs.5313
Posted: Fri May 10 16:56:52 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 12-May-85 04:40:50 EDT
References: <268@osiris.UUCP> <4148@mit-eddie.UUCP> <10517@brunix.UUCP> <231@spar.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 42

>                                                      Analysis can be fun, and
> >occasionally it gives insights into the whys of a piece, but more often it
> >resembles an attempt at a closed form solution of a 12-body problem.
> > -- Jeff Winslow
> 
>     I don't think that `analysis' is desirable at all except when addressing
>     a very esoteric audience indeed. It is possible to naively listen to the

Gee, I guess composers are pretty esoteric.  But I agree absolutely with
your next sentence.

>     most complex classical music without knowing the first thing about the
>     technical crap usually associated with classical analysis. All one needs
>     is listening experience and PATIENCE. The same goes for describing music.
>     -- michael ellis
>     
OK, but...

It is also possible to go through any number of courses given in musical
analysis and never get the foggiest idea what the point of it is. In my
opinion, this is the experience of about 90% of music majors. And about 99%
of net.music contributors. This is, I think, mainly the fault of the
instructors (who are probably just trying to perpetuate the tradition:-)),
and is the reason why so many people disdain anything labeled "analysis".
Considering what they were probably told, I'm not sure I blame them.

The point of analysis is to try to determine how (ie, by what musical means)
a piece makes a (good, satisfying, appropriate, beautiful, etc.) statement
(if it does). Sort of like a closed form solution of a 12-body problem...

It has about as much to do with writing down all the harmonies and sectioning
by thematic statement (typical pastimes in analysis classes) as writing a
novel has to do with knowing your ABC's, or reaching a scientific conclusion
has to do with gathering data.

If you're not interested in it, fine, but it's pointless to badmouth
those who are, or to claim that such an interest is "undesirable".
The people that do this are probably still stuck in the pretty, but
in my opinion childish philosophy that emotion and intellect are
somehow orthogonal. (insert half-serious sneer here.)

					Jeff Winslow