Philosophy of Music Experiencing - Essay Example

Music and Philosophy Introduction Music is organized sound. A philosopher introduces tonality as a feature of organized sound to help in differentiating between music and other non- musical organized sounds (Scruton 10). Another philosophical addition is an appeal to experience and aesthetic properties. Philosophy of music raises questions on nature and how we experience music. Contrasting other philosophical sciences philosophy of music has significant background in it. Music presents many philosophical puzzles. Music as an art has meaning but pure instruments have no observable semantic content. Historical background Aristotle and Plato philosophized in music. This philosophy predates and is dissimilar in some areas of modern philosophy art. Aesthetic assumptions of modernism strongly influence philosophy of music. Aesthetic principles distinguish craft and sciences from disciplines such as music, poetry, dance and sculpture. Ideas that proved relevant in distinguishing art from popular music are three. First, art being a product of genius continually evolve. Second, art is autonomous since its value is aesthetic. Third, the truth in fine art is similarly true about music. Philosophers in middle of eighteenth century regarded music as pillars of emerging systems of fine arts. Pure music Philosophers focus on pure/absolute music for three reasons; absolute music presents difficult philosophical problems. Secondly, pure musical case presents solutions easily evaluated and lastly pure music expressiveness play role in expressiveness of ‘impure music’. A text impacts its articulateness to a song and musical elements has role to play in a song. Pure music vs. programmed music Majority of philosophers opposing instrument based music came from Richard Wagner whose works was programmatic using vocalization. According to Wagner where music can’t go further, comes the word and words stands superior than the tone. Romantic philosophers saw music more than human ‘language’ but as transcendent means to a higher realm of order. According to philosophers in absolute music, pure music is the answer to mysteries of life. Musical Ontology Musical ontology focuses on musical things and the realties that hold them together. Metaphysical nature in classical music is the field of discussion under music ontology. The study focuses on how to give authentic performances in classical music genre. Recently jazz and rock among other musical traditions ontologies have seen growth, philosophers engage in this field when they analyze a variety of distinct kinds of sounds that count as music. Philosophers think popular music complicates traditional ontology of music. The relevance of ontology emerges in Stephen Davies response to Baugh analysis of rock music. Skepticism about musical Ontology According to Ridley musical ontology study is time wastage (p.105). He rejects the ideas that Ontological puzzles about music are not genuine, musical ontology has no inference on musical aesthetics and that ontology depends on value of musical judgment. Music and emotions Philosophical questions in this section; how is music capable of expressing emotions? What are the emotional responses to music? Why do we listen in to music which elicits negative responses? Theorists restrict themselves with absolute music for simplicity. The simplicity helps in understanding how music with accompanying text elicits emotions from listeners. Emotional expressivity of music is the philosophical problem. Paradigm expressers of emotions form psychological agents. Music is expressive rather than representing. Emotions in the listener Philosophical main questions: analogues to ‘paradox of fiction’. The reason why express emotions when expressive music is played are not clearly established. Second question is alternate of ‘paradox of tragedy’ if music arouses ‘negative’ emotions why do we listen to music? According to Robinson, all emotional responses are cognitive (p.387). For instance response to fortissimo blow to bass drum. Similarly non-cognitive response to basic musical is observed. Two possible explanations emerges in higher order emotional response; phenomenon of ‘mirroring responses’ (Davies 280). When surrounded by sad music one might become sad because of the music appearance. However this has been rejected by several philosophers. Understanding music Humans understand music rather than just listen. The reaction would be different to that of an animal listening to loud music. Using analogue, a mere sound of music can be represented by sonogram. Our experience of music is represented to some extent as to a marked-up score. We experience notes individually which make up the melodies, rhythms, harmonies and sections. Understanding of particular piece or style of music depends with an individual (Davies 89). Musical experience is experience of tone as opposed to pitched sounds. A tone is a ‘musical space’. The experience is irreducibly metaphorical and it will involve movement of spatial concepts. Music and value Disputes will arise when nature of aesthetic together with artistic value come into the mind of a philosopher. There are two centers of consensus of the dispute; first many philosophers will see the value of artwork as intrinsic to them. The value of artwork is proportionate to experience the work affords (Davies 374). Philosophers will answer the question about the experience that makes an artwork valuable. Secondly consensus will be by pleasure. Other sources claim music as an abstract art ‘par excellence’. Dimensions to solutions to pure music value are finite; the degree which the art is really abstract to the extent one thinks music is not related to real world. Another theory on pure music value is the abstractness. Aesthetics (popular music) Popular music before monopolized concentration in philosophical debate in music was assumed different from higher music genre or art music. Popular music poses two projects for the philosopher to undertake; i. The attention received by popular music act as a test case of musical philosophies. ii. Popular music is the focal point in art and aesthetic value debate. Majority of philosopher see popular music as rich field marginalized by traditional aesthetics. Popular music presupposes differences to serious music but majority prefer popular music to serious music. The difference in reception of popular and serious music generates philosophical issues. Philosophers have the opinion that popular music introduces a major counterexample in entrenching doctrines in art philosophy. Criticisms of Popular Music Adorno offers sophisticated influential criticism of popular music in the twentieth century (p 487). He criticizes the characteristics of popular music as for mass art and entertainment value only. According to Adorno if the culture cannot produce ‘art’ then popular music is acceptable (p. 490). Adorno’s analysis on popular music goes into outright criticism when contrasted with ‘fine’ art music. Artistic truth is not saying conventionally true statements or socially oppositional statements. Relativity of artistic truth is influenced by reception and creation. He sees no distinctive distinctions within popular music. Popular music lacks conventional easy pleasures and beauty. Aside from Adorno, popular music received very limited philosophical attention in periods before 1960s. Defense of Popular Music Modernist view ‘higher’ forms of music will satisfy the majority of the advanced modes of response. Philosophical debates have proven that popular music is interesting philosophically than how modernism suggests. Superior genres require active, focused listening and more attention than abstract structures. Popular music is aesthetic deficient as compared to superior genres of music. It will sacrifice autonomy because it’s motivated by functional needs for emotional expressions. Richard Shusterman has several essays that challenge standards criticism to popular music. This genre has popularity but has no complexity and it cannot combine both. According to Richard Shusterman distinctions between low and high music will not correspond to distinctive aesthetic differences. He concedes that majority of popular music is aesthetically low or poor. He however argues some of the popular music succeeds aesthetically and offering social progression to prevailing cultural biasness. In his essays hip-hop a popular music is analyzed as rhythmically funky and philosophical insightful. Finally Shusterman argues that popular music has additional merit in postmodern challenge to modernist categories which dominated philosophical aesthetics (Sharpe 40). He proposes hip-hop as a postmodern strategy of appropriation and recycling. Conclusion Music possesses many philosophical puzzles and philosophers find the answers to those questions. Most musical cultures will have significant background in philosophy of music. Philosophy of music is different from other philosophy sciences in many ways. The central questions of epistemology and metaphysics will show people grasp philosophical questions music raise. People will have thought of the questions before the encounter with the academic discipline. Music and philosophy though different in approaches, they are intertwined in many ways. It comes down that philosophy reveals some details about music that people fail to uncover. Works Cited Adorno, Theodor W, Richard D. Leppert, and Susan H. Gillespie. Essays on music. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 2002. Print. Adorno, Theodor W, and Robert Kentor. Philosophy of new music. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2006. Print. Davies, Stephen. Musical works and performances a philosophical exploration. Oxford [England: Clarendon Press; 2001. Print. Ridley, Aaron. The philosophy of music: theme and variations. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004. Print. Scruton, Roger. The aesthetics of music. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997. Print. Sharpe, R. A. Philosophy of music. Montréal: McGill-Queens University Press, 2004. Print. Read More