You can observe on yourself spontaneously in your first responses, and in others comments on Bach's video (or video of works wich was still supposed to be of his own, even if its false, it doesn't matter, the placebo effect works). Its necessarely hyperbolism... awe-inspiring, or something about god (more than a man, superior inspiration, mathematically perfect). Like an eloge for a prince. Nothing very sincere in fact.
Bach is the ...( 1 week ago by Golmon251)
Bach is the macdonald's of the culture, present everywhere. You know, peacefull Ronald macdo who present the food like toys for the children. Its effective. The art/science/spiricism (ingredients his music is supposed to contain) are presented with Bach like something amusing, you can write anything and its contrary, this is simple/complicated, mathematicaly rigourous/pure emotion, your a genius if you love it. One day everybody joke of Ronald and is ballon, but a few get out of macdo addict.
Hum. Spirituality ...( 1 week ago by Golmon251)
Hum. Spirituality instead of spiricism. but no place.
Aren't these ...( 1 week ago by TintedReasoning)
Aren't these utterly pointless debates that pepper youtube absolutely charming? I'm glad I managed to find one. What I find amusing though is ironically, not the arguments, but that reaffirmation of an age old analogy between an opinionated man and a race horse. Blind, blind to absolutely everything but what is seemingly in front of them. But who am I to speak? I'm arguing, so naturally, I'm not any better.
As I said before, I ...( 1 week ago by p0lyph0ny)
As I said before, I don't recall using religious language in describing my experience with Bach's music. Awe-inspiring, yes. For me this is not insincere hyperbole; it is just how I experience the music. But I have no way to prove this to you.
In any case, I take your comments in good faith as being a sincere reflection of your own musical experience, and I really don't see why you insist upon assuming the worst in others' comments, except perhaps that doing so affirms your own preconceptions.
What is this ...( 1 week ago by TintedReasoning)
What is this argument ( or whatever you name it to be) about, anyway? I read through the discourse and am completely lost to the objective of both your bickering. And, just as a passing comment, I'm curious as to why neither of you brilliant minds couldn't pick on irony of dubbing something anachronistic innovation. Of course, maybe to the refined mind it simply stands as a paradox and not a mere ironic contradiction of definitions.
I'm attempting (in ...( 1 week ago by p0lyph0ny)
I'm attempting (in far too many comments, probably) to argue that the fact that Bach's music is based in what were anachronistic forms in his day (fugue, canon, etc) doesn't mean that the music cannot have originality within those forms (this is the concept I was trying to describe with 'anachronistic innovation'), that such music can (and is) meaningful to many people, and that we are really not fit to judge one anothers' personal musical experience.
I suppose was your ...( 1 week ago by TintedReasoning)
I suppose was your point was simply lost on me amidst the ripe irony of calling anything ' anachronistic innovation'. I suppose the term is simply 're-innovation'. Something all of art and indeed humanity depend on but indeed our ability to appreciate art does not, as I believe, depend solely on innovation of any form. "Originality" which, I suppose, denotes that concept of re-innovation, is not a pre-requisite appreciating a piece of music.
As to the issue of ...( 1 week ago by TintedReasoning)
As to the issue of 'judging one anothers' personal musical experience' is a contradiction in itself. Doesn't the phrase 'personal experience' convey that it is an individual, and not collective appreciation that is in question. If so, isn't the whole point to form your own subjective opinion devoid of the constraints of any obligation to the norms of any conventional opinion. It's as if to judge a person's liking of the colour red over green. -sigh-
Well, I am agreeing ...( 1 week ago by TintedReasoning)
Well, I am agreeing with you, although I don't see how my opinion really matter in the grand scheme of things the two of you have managed to created. I am curious though. Eitherway, I won't make an already over-complicated argument more so by adding my take on matters ( although I have done a considerable amount of that already, for which I apologize, I simply could not resist). Good day to you two both and good luck!
It could finish ...( 1 week ago by Golmon251)
It could finish quickly, if p0lyph0ny make me see, because I know I'm blind, and I want him to help me, another explication than my very imperfect one of this very simple point: If the commentaries are always sinceres and intelligents, is it an hasard if we can read the same eloge about a real piece of Bach (Art of Fugue) and a false attribution (Fugue and Toccata for exemple)?
Do you realize that the unique name of Bach, like the Big Mac, remplace today plenty of ancients savourous things?
eloges=praises( 1 week ago by Golmon251)
eloges=praises
Well, I have never ...( 1 week ago by p0lyph0ny)
Well, I have never been particularly fond of the d minor Toccata and Fugue, honestly. I find it a bit gimmicky and not particularly moving, personally. (Though the evidence that it is falsely attributed is not as unequivocal as you make it out to be.) But if other people getting something out of it, all the better. Bach is not the beginning and end of the musical universe, even within the late Baroque period.
to be continued
-continuation
In ...( 1 week ago by p0lyph0ny)
-continuation
In any case, I never claimed that the commentaries are *always* sincere and intelligent. Some probably are motivated out of extramusical associations with the name of Bach. But I prefer to assume that people are being sincere and maybe be wrong now and again than to take a cruel and cynical view of others' artistic experiences.
Yes, and perhaps I ...( 1 week ago by p0lyph0ny)
Yes, and perhaps I was begging the question a bit with the phrase "personal musical experience," but really, this is why phrases like "greatest musician of all time" annoy me so much. Besides the fact that it limits one's possibility of discovery by insisting that there can be nothing greater, it also imposes the notion of an objective standard of "greatness" against which individuals' experiences of music can be judged.
I know what you ...( 1 week ago by p0lyph0ny)
I know what you mean about not being able to resist. This whole argument/discussion/whatever probably has been a total exercise in futility, and yet...
Like most youtube arguments, it's probably become an argument over ego and who gets the last word as much as anything else by this point :\. Oh well. Human nature, I guess...
Last comment (we ...( 1 week ago by p0lyph0ny)
Last comment (we hope):
Good point wrt originality & the appreciation of art. I suppose that while originality and re-innovation are necessary to prevent the stagnation of art and of the human condition in general, it's not a prerequisite for the enjoyment of art.
If you feel your ...( 1 week ago by Golmon251)
If you feel your ego when I touch Bach reputation its problematic. And I just take in serious and developed as such the absurds things forming consensus of experts repeated here, and tacked on excuse to don't discover to anothers classicals musicians, and impose the neccesitie of the atonal reform (Bach had strictely delimited the tonality possibilities); that you didn't take the time to corrige when it seemed positive for AoF,that nothing can reach or even be compared to (mad by human being)
I propose you to ...( 1 week ago by Golmon251)
I propose you to stop this boring discution, but think that I'm force to listen to the music when I write. Not bad at all finally, when i listen to it again and again like a publicity. Maybe inspiring, its suffisant for me, the inspiration and emulation is one of the best thing in human being. But I think its, to compare and make my personnal hierarchy, very poor and unsurprizing for a classical piece. Its a bit hypnotizing.
I agree that it's ( ...( 1 week ago by p0lyph0ny)
I agree that it's (past) time to stop the discussion. FWIW, I don't think it was about ego from the beginning, but I fear that in the endless repetition of the same arguments, that's what it's becoming. Unfortunate.
You find AoF a bit hypnotizing, I find it contemplative and awe-inspiring. Such is the variability of human experience, manifested in music.
The following ...( 1 week ago by Golmon251)
The following existential question for our courageous friends is: does it was composed for keyboards ? Ready for a very interesting debat ? Let's Go !!!
I plaisant...
The last sarcasm ...( 1 week ago by Golmon251)
The last sarcasm was for me. I'm sorry for he insult and familiarity, next time I will directly say that i want a discussion. But in general (not all) the Bachs fan are exactly the contrary of you.
Whatever. And I perfectly understand that all humans are differents (I was talking about a kind of uniformisation of the classical... I shut up definitely... if you don't ask me a question.).
Your right its past time to stop.
Have a nice day (night) !
"The" ...( 1 week ago by vinciano)
"The" interpretation of "The" work of Art.
Why bother with ...( 1 day ago by LutenistDeMari)
Why bother with someone who calls the art of fugue 'unsurprising'.
Do you realize that the unique name of Bach, like the Big Mac, remplace today plenty of ancients savourous things?
I plaisant...
Whatever. And I perfectly understand that all humans are differents (I was talking about a kind of uniformisation of the classical... I shut up definitely... if you don't ask me a question.).
Your right its past time to stop.
Have a nice day (night) !