NTT: I accidentally cheated and so am recusing myself.
Schopenhauser and Grand Opera: Whew, I don't think I can get anywhere close to getting all my thoughts out here. In general, I disagree with Schopenhauer here (though I do love me a good cranky curmudgeon). But, opera is an incredibly difficult medium to pull off well in production as so many different arts and skills need to come together to make it work...so there are going to be times (even a lot of times) when the drama and production will fail to live up to the music. If you're giving primacy to the music, which I generally do (as I think that is partly the why of opera), then there are going to be disappointments. Prima la musica e poi le parole.
However, even if the music comes first, the words are still there, and I have had too many experiences where the music has been enhanced by the interaction with the words and the drama to not recognize the affecting power opera has when it all comes together. Focusing solely on Schopenhauer's beloved Mozart...I've been to productions where both his great music (Figaro) and his...less great music (Lucio Silla) have been served by the production in a way that made the music better. When it comes together, opera is an artistic marvel.
Like Joseph, I am wary of the notion of absolutes (and I think any mention of purity is a red flag for me). I also don't really buy into the whole concept of pitting musical and artistic genres against each other to find the greatest form. Give me diversity of art.
Of course, all that being said, music for the clarinet is superior to everything else and everyone knows it.
First of all, hilarious that Schopenhauer lumps together the symphony and the *mass* as his ideals of undisturbed musical enjoyment - as if mass settings are abstract music!
Overall, though, though I don't agree with Schopenhauer (and Will), I recognize it as a matter of taste. He favors artistic experiences that are confined to a single medium - one sense at a time. Old Art is not a fan of stir fry - he wants his food groups separate upon his plate. I disagree with him only in the sense that our tastes are different - I quite enjoy a well-put-together Gesamtkunstwerk! (I suppose I also disagree with him that such mixed media is "not really a product of the pure artistic sense." I mean c'mon!)
As for not listening to the scores of musical theatre disconnected from a theatrical performance, I think that's also a matter of taste for me - I simply don't like that particular musical genre enough to enjoy it exclusively as sound art. On the other hand, I'd rather listen to the 4 Sea Interludes from Britten's "Peter Grimes" without watching whatever machinations an opera director has drummed up for scene changes in that opera - because I like the genre.
Schopenhauer's conviction in absolutes is a very 19th century approach - can't we all have it our own way??
NTT: I accidentally cheated and so am recusing myself.
Schopenhauser and Grand Opera: Whew, I don't think I can get anywhere close to getting all my thoughts out here. In general, I disagree with Schopenhauer here (though I do love me a good cranky curmudgeon). But, opera is an incredibly difficult medium to pull off well in production as so many different arts and skills need to come together to make it work...so there are going to be times (even a lot of times) when the drama and production will fail to live up to the music. If you're giving primacy to the music, which I generally do (as I think that is partly the why of opera), then there are going to be disappointments. Prima la musica e poi le parole.
However, even if the music comes first, the words are still there, and I have had too many experiences where the music has been enhanced by the interaction with the words and the drama to not recognize the affecting power opera has when it all comes together. Focusing solely on Schopenhauer's beloved Mozart...I've been to productions where both his great music (Figaro) and his...less great music (Lucio Silla) have been served by the production in a way that made the music better. When it comes together, opera is an artistic marvel.
Like Joseph, I am wary of the notion of absolutes (and I think any mention of purity is a red flag for me). I also don't really buy into the whole concept of pitting musical and artistic genres against each other to find the greatest form. Give me diversity of art.
Of course, all that being said, music for the clarinet is superior to everything else and everyone knows it.
First of all, hilarious that Schopenhauer lumps together the symphony and the *mass* as his ideals of undisturbed musical enjoyment - as if mass settings are abstract music!
Overall, though, though I don't agree with Schopenhauer (and Will), I recognize it as a matter of taste. He favors artistic experiences that are confined to a single medium - one sense at a time. Old Art is not a fan of stir fry - he wants his food groups separate upon his plate. I disagree with him only in the sense that our tastes are different - I quite enjoy a well-put-together Gesamtkunstwerk! (I suppose I also disagree with him that such mixed media is "not really a product of the pure artistic sense." I mean c'mon!)
As for not listening to the scores of musical theatre disconnected from a theatrical performance, I think that's also a matter of taste for me - I simply don't like that particular musical genre enough to enjoy it exclusively as sound art. On the other hand, I'd rather listen to the 4 Sea Interludes from Britten's "Peter Grimes" without watching whatever machinations an opera director has drummed up for scene changes in that opera - because I like the genre.
Schopenhauer's conviction in absolutes is a very 19th century approach - can't we all have it our own way??