Hobbes' Choice wrote: Conde Lucanor wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
I think it depends of the context. If you love spaghetti, you's love this, but many would find it over-the-top.
Is there anything that does not depend on the context? And is there anything in musical appreciation that is not subjective?
Obviously all appreciation has to be subjective. But some music can stand alone, and have no specific context by which it is appreciated.
Yes if by context you mean only non-musical context and if we are talking about the autonomy of artistic forms, which does not mean there's no context, just that the art work is liberated from it. But except from the rare exceptions of modern art, most music has been born as accompaniment to something else, often another artistic form.
Hobbes' Choice wrote:Music specifically designed to accompany a film can fail on it's own.
It can fail, but that is was designed to accompany the film is not what would make it fail on its own.
Hobbes' Choice wrote:A great piece of music can transcend all the contexts which have been thrust upon it. For example despite the connections between Wagner & Beethoven with Nietzsche & Hitler, their music can emerge untainted.
Sure, I agree. It shows the autonomy of artistic forms.
Hobbes' Choice wrote:Morricone will always be associated with the purpose of the themes.
With that I tend to disagree, since I feel like his music can stand on his own. And even when associated to the films, the power of that association comes not only from his mastery in evoking the spirit of the film or an scene, but from creating that language that people will recognize later as naturally associated to those scenes. Before the spaghetti westerns, music from American westerns didn't sound anything like that. Actually stereotypical and dull.