Much could be said at this point about what constitutes
“carnal music”. Certainly almost all
Christian musicians would agree that words on carnal themes are never
appropriate for use in religious music. The problem comes when musicians
discuss the formal properties of a piece of music that are considered to be
carnal or suggestive. First of all, if
music philosophers are strict (absolute) formalists, absolute expressionists,
or symbolists, they will most likely contend that if music does have meaning
(some of the aforementioned schools of philosophy do not clearly purport that
music has any meaning), its “meaning is in no way related to life outside of
the art of music.
If it seems to the reader that these aforementioned philosophies
are confusing, it is because they are both conflicting and confusing. One of the reasons that I have been drawn
toward the referentialist viewpoint is that I believe that the music part of
music, and all the concepts that surround the formal properties of music,
definitely have a great potential to affect the whole-life of the performer and
the auditor. One should remember that
music referentialists believe that musical meaning takes reference, at least partially,
from the extra-musical world of concepts, actions, emotional states, and
character.
No comments:
Post a Comment