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