Epic songs: two Dreams sorrounding one Reality?

ExittheLemming wrote: The humanoid critter's love of symmetry is well documented. Even a casual glance at the classical symphonic tradition might just give us an inkling that popular music strives for the same aesthetic satisfaction as that found in something like the golden mean/ratio etc. It's just another example of a pleasing structure that has been around since powdered wigs were considered the preserve of 'longhairs'

The humanoid critter's love of symmetry is well documented. Even a casual glance at the classical symphonic tradition might just give us an inkling that popular music strives for the same aesthetic satisfaction as that found in something like the golden mean/ratio etc. It's just another example of a pleasing structure that has been around since powdered wigs were considered the preserve of 'longhairs'

Much too heavy for my way of thinking.

In my mind there are two connected reasons for the split:

1) Simply to avoid the song getting to be too long. I have the feeling that for some people PF's Shine On or Lark's Tongues would start to drag a bit when played as a continuous song. In the early 70's, with people not really used to such mammoth tracks, it was a sensible decision.

2) It's a neat idea to do it that way.

It's a coincidence. I was listening to Senmuth's "RXG-242-11". The opener is Megiste Syntaxis 1 and the closer "Megiste Syntaxis 2. Thos tracks are effectively different from the rest of the album. 

I'm not so expert of KC and DT so I can't say. I have to think to something else. 

sohraab wrote: octopus-4 wrote: I'm not sure to catch the question: Is ELP - The Endless Enigma a valid example? i`m sorry my friend but since ELP is not my cup of tea, i can not judge or even analyze their music as well. so if u consider PF shine on u it`s better for me. anyway it is not a question. i`m just trying to figure out kind of psychological reason for two-halved epics at the beginning and end of the albums. i introduced my own theory. waiting for others opinions. thx.

I'm not sure to catch the question: Is ELP - The Endless Enigma a valid example?

Any Colour You Like wrote: sohraab wrote: Any Colour You Like wrote: If you want my opinion, you're overanalysing it. All art is inherently subjective, and any attempt to describe, categorise or analyse is bound by limited human conciousness. Life and art are essentially the same thing, for without either they can have no interpretive meaning. ok your idea is respectable. but i can not agree with that art is bound by limited human consciousness. it is proven many years ago by the very basic physiological science studies that almost all of the artistic activities and thoughts are promoted by the right half of the human`s brain which is indeed the responsible half for unconscious acts; ves. left half which rules the logically driven consciously activities. (see Ernest Jones and also Zigmund Freud works if interested). if you like i`ll be glad to provide more information for you. Ok. If art can be unconciously analysed, recognised or even perceived, how does this manifest itself in concious thought or perception?

it`s simple. right half and left half of the brain are connected to each other via a thin layer. that`s how they transfer data to each other. in fact, any action that we do, which is in our case music composing, is the product of both parts of the brain. the share which is processed by left part is mostly ruled by conscious abilities which is in our case say, musical profession in terms of theoretical education of music composing. but the more important part of music composing flows out of our right brain, say unconscious.  i give u a simple example. IMPROVISATION. this is exactly a part of music which is totally unconsciously driven. the proof is that u see Robert Fripp improvise, if u ask him to do it again in next 24 hours he can not do the same improvisation. because this is exactly a `particularly unconscious product of brain` which can not be resembled!
the interviewer asks Dave Gilmour about the opening strings of shine on you. where did it come to your mind? he answers no where! it just came in one moment! this is what is called unconsciously composed music and in a broader definition, unconsciously created Art.

Any Colour You Like wrote: If you want my opinion, you're overanalysing it. All art is inherently subjective, and any attempt to describe, categorise or analyse is bound by limited human conciousness. Life and art are essentially the same thing, for without either they can have no interpretive meaning.

ok your idea is respectable. but i can not agree with that art is bound by limited human consciousness. it is proven many years ago by the very basic physiological science studies that almost all of the artistic activities and thoughts are promoted by the right half of the human`s brain which is indeed the responsible half for unconscious acts; ves. left half which rules the logically driven consciously activities. (see Ernest Jones and also Zigmund Freud works if interested).
if you like i`ll be glad to provide more information for you.

Any Colour You Like wrote: sohraab wrote: 190 views and only 1 reply?! ok. maybe this one is a little deep and complicated one for most of the readers Be warned, this is not deep. Enter Moshkito.

thank uuuuuuuuuuuuu! at last someone said something!!! of course it is not deep for me as i told but for others maybe... and if not also deep for u, so i`m waiting for anything which ignites the flame of discussion! u r more than welcome.