| Revision as of 19:36, 16 October 2004 editHyacinth (talk | contribs)176,976 edits reply, questions actually← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:57, 16 October 2004 edit undoHerschelkrustofsky (talk | contribs)2,877 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| :::It seems unecessary. What is developed in development? ] 19:36, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC) | :::It seems unecessary. What is developed in development? ] 19:36, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC) | ||
| Perhaps I am overcompensating for the notion, that I am certain is widespread, that the essence of music is a pleasing melody that evokes "feelings." I think it might be useful to find a quote -- perhaps you know one? -- from a noted composer, on how melodies are chosen to meet the requirements of a developmental idea, and not the other way around. I recognize that this is not universal practice among classical composers, but as you have pointed out, not all putatively classical music has development. --] 19:57, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 19:57, 16 October 2004
Greetings to Hyacinth -- I tinkered with your edit, reverting part of a sentence. I am going to be cautious about further edits, however, because I have done a fair amount of composing and my formulations about the process of composition may stray into the realm of Original Research. --Herschelkrustofsky 21:07, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Where else would comparisons by listeners be made? And why would those comparisons not apply to development. Hyacinth 21:47, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- You are asking, where other than in the mind? Well, in the ears, I suppose; there is a bit of a controversy about whether music is primarily an experience of sensual beauty, in which case, Ravel and Rimsky-Korsakov would rank higher in the estimation of many than they presently do. There are both a sensual and a, shall we say, intellectual/spiritual aspect to the musical experience, and development belongs to the latter category. --Herschelkrustofsky 00:49, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Sound must pass the ears to reach the mind, but still you feel the need to specify? Hyacinth 19:36, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Also, I should explain why I prefer the expression "incarnations of the idea." It is because none of the "incarnations" is itself the idea, but rather, the process of transformation is the idea. --Herschelkrustofsky 12:37, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- It seems unecessary. What is developed in development? Hyacinth 19:36, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Perhaps I am overcompensating for the notion, that I am certain is widespread, that the essence of music is a pleasing melody that evokes "feelings." I think it might be useful to find a quote -- perhaps you know one? -- from a noted composer, on how melodies are chosen to meet the requirements of a developmental idea, and not the other way around. I recognize that this is not universal practice among classical composers, but as you have pointed out, not all putatively classical music has development. --Herschelkrustofsky 19:57, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)