Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 18058
Posted: March 22 2014 at 14:17
TODDLER wrote:
In the Court of the Crimson King was pretty "well thought out" obviously because Pete Sinfield and Robert Fripp were part of the band.
Possibly ... at least as clear as it might be in the article, and Pete Sinfield might have worked as a sort of "director" to keep things flowing and help define them better, which is not something that most rock/jazz bands do, and the music is considerably inferior because of it.
But it might not work sometimes.
The "perfectionist" side, is a whole other beast. If you have a "vision" in music, the definition of "perfect" is how well you define that vision into the musicians you have and how well they translate your vision. If something sounds wrong, then you likely scratch it or change it! Same thing for a writer! Perfect for me, is "seeing the movie" and being able to "translate it" into words well, so you can also see what I see, and I will tell you right now, REGARDLESS of how/what you or I understand!
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com
The improvisation section is centered around creating visuals for the listener ...because of the nature of the playing style on each individual instrument. Not in all cases is this concept of writing intended to be for anyone in the musicians mind....
You want to be careful here. What the audience sees/gets, has nothing to do with the actor/actress/musician. Conversely, what the actor/actress/musician thinks is not also what the audience picks up!
It never is, and this is the one thing that we deceive outselves on all the time. When you think you got this across, something else came across that you did not catch or see at all!
Improvisation is about helping find a/the/any "moment", and how to work with it. In the end, that "moment" is centered around "attention" and your ability to absorb and respond. Improvisation is not just about words, as some theater groups tend to make you think, and when you watch "What's my line?" you can tell right away what the "process" is, which is almost all sequential based on the physical movement, or last words.
For these music examples, it is not what this is about, and it is much more elaborate and way further than the fun exanple that Dean gave us that fit the "What's My Line?" show than it did in music, or a serious acting/film rehearsal, where you ALREADY have a flow, and you simply have to find "details" inside that "flow" that allow you to say your lines/music in a much better defined context.
Only the best of "actors" get to the advanced stage, mnore like 1 out of 40 from your acting school or the like, and the same is for music, and the main reason is because these folks have the ability to zero in the "moment" and make it better. Without that ability to get that far, and learn more, so you have more to work with, only means that your output will be grossly limited.
Thx
No-one is going to contradict an argument based on an improvised narrative (with or without a text) but I think you're falling into the trap of believing that music is capable of being just as representational as the other arts. It should be self evident that music is probably the most abstract of all the arts and the least endowed in this regard. What is often likened to Painting pictures with sound is a gross fallacy, music expresses only itself (this is the basis of Stravinsky's oft misunderstood quote that all art is cold)
For I consider that music is, by its very nature, essentially powerless to express anything at all, whether a feeling, an attitude of mind, a psychological mood, a phenomenon of nature, etc. Expression
has never been an inherent property of music. That is by no means the
purpose of its existence. If, as is nearly always the case, music
appears to express something, this is only an illusion and not a reality (Igor Stravinsky)
and as Dean has already pointed out several pages ago, ain't the second part of Moonchild called 'The illusion?'
Joined: January 06 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 4287
Posted: March 23 2014 at 03:18
ExittheLemming wrote:
moshkito wrote:
TODDLER wrote:
The improvisation section is centered around creating visuals for the listener ...because of the nature of the playing style on each individual instrument. Not in all cases is this concept of writing intended to be for anyone in the musicians mind....
You want to be careful here. What the audience sees/gets, has nothing to do with the actor/actress/musician. Conversely, what the actor/actress/musician thinks is not also what the audience picks up!
It never is, and this is the one thing that we deceive outselves on all the time. When you think you got this across, something else came across that you did not catch or see at all!
Improvisation is about helping find a/the/any "moment", and how to work with it. In the end, that "moment" is centered around "attention" and your ability to absorb and respond. Improvisation is not just about words, as some theater groups tend to make you think, and when you watch "What's my line?" you can tell right away what the "process" is, which is almost all sequential based on the physical movement, or last words.
For these music examples, it is not what this is about, and it is much more elaborate and way further than the fun exanple that Dean gave us that fit the "What's My Line?" show than it did in music, or a serious acting/film rehearsal, where you ALREADY have a flow, and you simply have to find "details" inside that "flow" that allow you to say your lines/music in a much better defined context.
Only the best of "actors" get to the advanced stage, mnore like 1 out of 40 from your acting school or the like, and the same is for music, and the main reason is because these folks have the ability to zero in the "moment" and make it better. Without that ability to get that far, and learn more, so you have more to work with, only means that your output will be grossly limited.
Thx
No-one is going to contradict an argument based on an improvised narrative (with or without a text) but I think you're falling into the trap of believing that music is capable of being just as representational as the other arts. It should be self evident that music is probably the most abstract of all the arts and the least endowed in this regard. What is often likened to Painting pictures with sound is a gross fallacy, music expresses only itself (this is the basis of Stravinsky's oft misunderstood quote that all art is cold)
For I consider that music is, by its very nature, essentially powerless to express anything at all, whether a feeling, an attitude of mind, a psychological mood, a phenomenon of nature, etc. Expression
has never been an inherent property of music. That is by no means the
purpose of its existence. If, as is nearly always the case, music
appears to express something, this is only an illusion and not a reality (Igor Stravinsky)
and as Dean has already pointed out several pages ago, ain't the second part of Moonchild called 'The illusion?'
That is a
very interesting concept, do you know when Stravinsky made that statement ?
Just thinking it could be as a reaction to the Impressionists and romantic composers
attempt to express events of nature, mood of the night, ect. The counter
argument would be that any piece of art, is and will always be, just an illusion, but as long
as that illusion results in creating reactions in the attendance mind, it indirectly
becomes a reality. You can not create a snowstorm on a piano, but you may attemt to create music, call it snowstorm, and create a reaction in the mind, that it sounds like a snowstorm.
Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours
^ Interesting notion but with much programme music, the overriding temptation to infer from the music what the text asks us to visualize is almost impossible for humans to resist. (Especially if we only have sound without visuals) Think how many faces of the Virgin Mary are reported regularly in breakfast cereals, on toast and erm..in clouds etc) I guess this is what Dean means by the phenomenon of apophenia (albeit the sequences are not random but motivated) Unfortunately I don't know when Stravinsky made the 'art is cold' statement but yes, I agree it could certainly have been a reaction to what he might have considered the excessive sentimentality of the romantics etc. I liked the piano music you posted but I would not have imagined a snow-scene were it not for the title, so whether Liszt was successful in depicting a natural phenomenon with music I dunno?
Joined: January 06 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 4287
Posted: March 23 2014 at 05:18
No that was also my point, There is no such thing as Dark Metal, music is not a visual, or Melancholic prog, music is not a state of mind, but with lyrics, titles, cover paintings, ect. artists create a "room" for our mind, to reflect. Because it is in our nature to create internal pictures or film, when we listen to music, read books ect. We have the same thing when people say Gentle Giant sounds medival, they do not, but by combining our assumtions on how medival folk music may have sounded, with coral vocal arangements, they create a beliveable illusion of music from the past.
Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours
No that was also my point, There is no such thing as Dark Metal, music is not a visual, or Melancholic prog, music is not a state of mind, but with lyrics, titles, cover paintings, ect. artists create a "room" for our mind, to reflect. Because it is in our nature to create internal pictures or film, when we listen to music, read books ect. We have the same thing when people say Gentle Giant sounds medival, they do not, but by combining our assumtions on how medival folk music may have sounded, with coral vocal arangements, they create a beliveable illusion of music from the past.
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 18058
Posted: March 23 2014 at 11:00
ExittheLemming wrote:
... No-one is going to contradict an argument based on an improvised narrative (with or without a text) but I think you're falling into the trap of believing that music is capable of being just as representational as the other arts. It should be self evident that music is probably the most abstract of all the arts and the least endowed in this regard.
...
That's a matter of opinion. But the more film, theater you do, and write (like I do), the more you see one thing, that I think you are not catching right off.
IT'S THE PERSON, THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE.
These processes come and go no differently than Michelangelo! There are some minor variations here and there that one can interpret with different words. But the essence is the same. The "silence" exercise is a massive one in acting. And guess what musicians are deathly afraid of working on and with? SILENCE. "Moonchild" is masterful in that respect, though this is not something that we are willing to try and do, when we are in such a mechanical and industrialized society, in order to see a bit of quiet and piece and no sound or noise!
I tend to quote mystics a lot more than artists, for my references into the "unknown" and the "unknowable", mostly because those mystic's works were about defining those moments. Most "artistic" work has become a form of brainiac process, that completely disregards the forms of experiment and other details that are difficult to even put words to.
Try reading something like Aleister Crowley's Moonchild, as an example. Or a Dennis Wheatley story. It will drive you insane, because you never realized how far and how detailed and how insane the inner trip can be, regardless of it being called "magic" in this case, and not "art", because it's visual nature is just as awesome and just as powerful. We're scared shipless of these things!
And this is the reason why things like the Bardo, in the old days, when it was written, considered these many of these events described as dragons or beasts, because we immediately ran the other way!
What Stravinsky is stating is an "illusion" is what you think his work means ...because only he can express each second and moment, like we have no idea. Our own visionary moments, create something that for him is totally different, and not real, and OF COURSE, it is an illusion!
But don't forget the most important part of it all. There is only one "truth" and we're all sitting around it, and seeing different things in it.
ALL I'm doing, is trying to put some words and experiences in those moments, that I have experienced, and I was a directing major, and specialized in psychic and "invisible" exercises with actors, and all of them worked, to the point that when I was directing another play, someone asked me to try more of those exercises. It all depends on your "acceptance" level, and your belief system.
I DON'T HAVE a belief system! I can only tell you what I experience, and have seen! Don't forget that!
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com
Joined: June 09 2004
Location: Front Range
Status: Offline
Points: 7028
Posted: March 23 2014 at 15:19
tamijo wrote:
No that was also my point, There is no such thing as Dark Metal, music is not a visual, or Melancholic prog, music is not a state of mind, but with lyrics, titles, cover paintings, ect. artists create a "room" for our mind, to reflect. Because it is in our nature to create internal pictures or film, when we listen to music, read books ect. We have the same thing when people say Gentle Giant sounds medival, they do not, but by combining our assumtions on how medival folk music may have sounded, with coral vocal arangements, they create a beliveable illusion of music from the past.
I think this could be the single most important post ever made on PA
<font color=Brown>Music - The Sound Librarian
...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR]
... No-one is going to contradict an argument based on an improvised narrative (with or without a text) but I think you're falling into the trap of believing that music is capable of being just as representational as the other arts. It should be self evident that music is probably the most abstract of all the arts and the least endowed in this regard.
...
That's a matter of opinion. But the more film, theater you do, and write (like I do), the more you see one thing, that I think you are not catching right off.
IT'S THE PERSON, THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE.
These processes come and go no differently than Michelangelo! There are some minor variations here and there that one can interpret with different words. But the essence is the same. The "silence" exercise is a massive one in acting. And guess what musicians are deathly afraid of working on and with? SILENCE. "Moonchild" is masterful in that respect, though this is not something that we are willing to try and do, when we are in such a mechanical and industrialized society, in order to see a bit of quiet and piece and no sound or noise!
I tend to quote mystics a lot more than artists, for my references into the "unknown" and the "unknowable", mostly because those mystic's works were about defining those moments. Most "artistic" work has become a form of brainiac process, that completely disregards the forms of experiment and other details that are difficult to even put words to.
Try reading something like Aleister Crowley's Moonchild, as an example. Or a Dennis Wheatley story. It will drive you insane, because you never realized how far and how detailed and how insane the inner trip can be, regardless of it being called "magic" in this case, and not "art", because it's visual nature is just as awesome and just as powerful. We're scared shipless of these things!
And this is the reason why things like the Bardo, in the old days, when it was written, considered these many of these events described as dragons or beasts, because we immediately ran the other way!
What Stravinsky is stating is an "illusion" is what you think his work means ...because only he can express each second and moment, like we have no idea. Our own visionary moments, create something that for him is totally different, and not real, and OF COURSE, it is an illusion!
But don't forget the most important part of it all. There is only one "truth" and we're all sitting around it, and seeing different things in it.
ALL I'm doing, is trying to put some words and experiences in those moments, that I have experienced, and I was a directing major, and specialized in psychic and "invisible" exercises with actors, and all of them worked, to the point that when I was directing another play, someone asked me to try more of those exercises. It all depends on your "acceptance" level, and your belief system.
I DON'T HAVE a belief system! I can only tell you what I experience, and have seen! Don't forget that!
Sorry Pedro, I can only make sense of about 10% of that (tops) What Stravinsky is stating to be an illusion is what anyone thinks his work means (including the composer) There is nothing to be inferred from his statement:
music is, by its very nature, essentially powerless to express
anything at all, whether a feeling, an attitude of mind, a psychological
mood, a phenomenon of nature, etc. Expression
has never been an inherent property of music
Why do you continue to compare apples with oranges here? Theatre and cinema can certainly both include music yes, but you are invariably describing the process of directing and coaching actors as if this were analogous to the composition of music. As far as the value of silence goes, Crimson have a lot of catching up to do to reach the masterly level attained by the late John Cage's equally tiresome 4.33. (a conceptual piece of chicanery written just to prove the impossibility of silence) Just like dialogue, the pauses between the words or the rests between the notes have always been a prerequisite for coherence and we don't require mystics to teach us how to suck eggs.. I don't really think you need to provide further proof that reading Crowley or Wheatley would drive anyone insane. You also make a reference to the liminal state re Tibetan Buddism's Bardo but it's relevance is lost on me. (No-one died in the making of Moonchild did they? Not sure if I have a belief system or if I can even guess how many 'truths' there might be, but I am sure I seldom believe a word you ever type.
So...understanding or appreciating Moonchild is about social status and class...?
It makes a change, usually anything to do with understanding or appreciating abstract forms of music is presented from a perspective of elitism and delivered in a patronising manner...
Hope you didn't interpret Baldjean acting in this manner. That would be unfair.
Joined: September 03 2005
Location: Olympus Mons
Status: Offline
Points: 15926
Posted: April 04 2014 at 21:42
After 6 pages of banter, I am no closer to understanding Moonchild any more than I have for the last 25 years - a beautiful introduction leading in to some magical, avant-garde sonic expressionism. Always loved this outstanding piece of Crimso. Tinkly improv isn't everyone's cup of tea.
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: April 05 2014 at 01:50
progbethyname wrote:
Dean wrote:
dr wu23 wrote:
So...understanding or appreciating Moonchild is about social status and class...?
It makes a change, usually anything to do with understanding or appreciating abstract forms of music is presented from a perspective of elitism and delivered in a patronising manner...
Hope you didn't interpret Baldjean acting in this manner. That would be unfair.
Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20659
Posted: April 05 2014 at 10:55
Tom Ozric wrote:
After 6 pages of banter, I am no closer to understanding Moonchild any more than I have for the last 25 years - a beautiful introduction leading in to some magical, avant-garde sonic expressionism. Always loved this outstanding piece of Crimso. Tinkly improv isn't everyone's cup of tea.
I'm not sure what there is to 'understand'.....its a nice melodic piece with some improvisational noodling at the end.
What I don't get is the 6 pages of 'banter' about it.
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin
After 6 pages of banter, I am no closer to understanding Moonchild any more than I have for the last 25 years - a beautiful introduction leading in to some magical, avant-garde sonic expressionism. Always loved this outstanding piece of Crimso. Tinkly improv isn't everyone's cup of tea.
I'm not sure what there is to 'understand'.....its a nice melodic piece with some improvisational noodling at the end.
What I don't get is the 6 pages of 'banter' about it.
Whether justified or not, the track has always polarised opinion and Prog fans do love to talk don't we? One man's cup of tea is another's piranha infested whirlpool
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 18058
Posted: April 05 2014 at 11:53
dr wu23 wrote:
Tom Ozric wrote:
After 6 pages of banter, I am no closer to understanding Moonchild any more than I have for the last 25 years - a beautiful introduction leading in to some magical, avant-garde sonic expressionism. Always loved this outstanding piece of Crimso. Tinkly improv isn't everyone's cup of tea.
I'm not sure what there is to 'understand'.....its a nice melodic piece with some improvisational noodling at the end.
What I don't get is the 6 pages of 'banter' about it.
I think, in the end, that most people are afraid of things they don't know, or understand. Because "improvisation" would, normally have no form, that would be a threat to their interpretation of the bible that tells you what to do and accept.
Can't have any ideas about anything. It's illegal, you know! (The City of Lost Children)
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com
Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13221
Posted: April 05 2014 at 14:12
moshkito wrote:
dr wu23 wrote:
Tom Ozric wrote:
After 6 pages of banter, I am no closer to understanding Moonchild any more than I have for the last 25 years - a beautiful introduction leading in to some magical, avant-garde sonic expressionism. Always loved this outstanding piece of Crimso. Tinkly improv isn't everyone's cup of tea.
I'm not sure what there is to 'understand'.....its a nice melodic piece with some improvisational noodling at the end.
What I don't get is the 6 pages of 'banter' about it.
I think, in the end, that most people are afraid of things they don't know, or understand. Because "improvisation" would, normally have no form, that would be a threat to their interpretation of the bible that tells you what to do and accept.
Can't have any ideas about anything. It's illegal, you know! (The City of Lost Children)
What a bunch of elitist twaddle. "Most" people on this board are fairly well-versed in music, and I would venture a guess that it is not a matter of being incapable of understanding the series of tinkles, pops, errant arpeggios and mellotronic mumbles that make up the last part of "Moonchild"; rather, it is that they understand that it is improvisatory but they just don't care for the series of tinkles, pops, errant arpeggios and mellotronic mumbles that make up the improvisation. Count me in that camp.
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
After 6 pages of banter, I am no closer to understanding Moonchild any more than I have for the last 25 years - a beautiful introduction leading in to some magical, avant-garde sonic expressionism. Always loved this outstanding piece of Crimso. Tinkly improv isn't everyone's cup of tea.
"Tinkly improv" ? Well said. It isn't very easy to muster up descriptive words to describe MOONCHILD.
It's strange, beautiful and kind of intense at times. One of KC's best.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.301 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Understanding Moonchild
Topic Options
TODDLER wrote:
)
) Just like dialogue, the pauses between the words or the rests between the notes have always been a prerequisite for coherence and we don't require mystics to teach us how to suck eggs.. I don't really think you need to provide further proof that reading Crowley or Wheatley would drive anyone insane. You also make a reference to the liminal state re Tibetan Buddism's Bardo but it's relevance is lost on me. (No-one died in the making of Moonchild did they?
