So music only has value to you insofar as you associate it with emotions a la states like "romantic" (and the old "happy," "sad," etc.) (as opposed to "purely aesthetic" emotional states that bear no relation to states that occur outside of experiencing artworks)?psycho wrote: ↑Fri Jan 15, 2021 12:04 amMusic is appreciated because we specialize in distinguishing patterns (of all kinds) and when a pattern is understood we are rewarded with a sense of pleasure.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 11:50 pmWhen we're talking about instrumental music, say, what would you say is an example of a novel idea about some aspect of reality that a musical artwork would be expressing?
You wouldn't say there can be bad art, poorly executed art, crap art, etc.?An artist can express himself unintentionally or intentionally and his creation may be considered art if others deem it valuable.
However, as patterns are associated with emotions, when listening to music, we also interpret it according to our associations. The music can be martial or romantic. As if a certain pattern of sounds, without any other information, could describe battles or loves.
No. There is art or there is no art. Either the idea is relevant and novel and its expression is executed with excellence or not.
Also you're saying that in your view there can be no bad art?