Kevin's had problems posting, and asked me to post this for him. I'm not sure whether he meant the explanation he sent in his email to me to be posted or not, but it's worth posting (so sorry, Kevin, if that's not what you intended!).
Kevin writes:
I absolutely love this video and needed to share it. I had
something a paragraph to accompany this video, but I think that this
video more lends itself to the discussion you and I had after class. You
drew my attention to how we often make the distinction between "High"
and "low" arts, but why? This video takes one of the mainstays of the
"high" art of music, the cello, and combined it with a mainstay of "low"
art forms, beatboxing. I would say that the result is quite incredible.
The piece is moving and at least to me very emotional. Pieces like this
are why some of us came to this school and career. I think this is a
stunning argument against the distinctions of "High" and "low" arts. I
don't think all music is good music, but I also don't think any of us
have the right to call what we do a higher art form than any other.
I'd have to say that all music is good music. You may not think so yourself, like for me I don't really care for country music, but millions of other people enjoy it, therefor I do not have the right to say that country music is overall bad. All music is good, it just may be good to some people and bad to others, its all relative. There is no such thing as "higher" and "lower" art forms when it comes to music. I think that is a very pretentious thing to insinuate. No matter what kind of music it is, its still music.
ReplyDeleteKevin...I don't know where you heard that beat boxing is considered a "low" form of art. Anyway, I agree that there's no such thing as "good" or "bad," "high" or "low" forms of music. It's all about preference and taste. I don't care for country or Justin Bieber....but other people love it. Who am I to stop them from loving them? I want to add, that "good" music also happens to be "popular" mainstream music...and often the radio plays a role in this. But it's about tastes and preference...which then will lead me to say that there's no good or bad taste ;)
ReplyDeleteDid we really discuss the difference between "high" and "low" forms of music? What's the distinction between the two? I'd really like to be enlightened on that so that I can understand. I do not agree that all music is good, simply because it's an opinion. Sure, other people might think music is good when you think it's bad; again, it's just an opinion thing. This video is so impressive. He combines so many different musical elements that some of us can only dream of doing. This video gives me chills every time.
ReplyDeleteTo everyone who is offended by the distinctions "high" and "low" forms of music, I don't believe Kevin is supporting those views. What I believe he's referring to is the general perception (or misconception as we all apparently believe) that classical music is a higher, more refined, art form than other art forms, jazz, rap, etc.
ReplyDeleteI think the error of the appellation "good music" lies, as Small might agree, in the way we define the term "music". Defined as a noun, "good music" refers to pieces, or forms of music. Defined as a verb, however, "good music" takes on the meaning we have all come to agree on: a performance that is enjoyable to both the performer and the audience. As a result, every kind of music may be "good music" for the simple reason that someone is bound to like it.
This is another beatboxing video that I love. This time the beatboxing flautist Greg Pattillo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crfrKqFp0Zg&feature=fvwrel
I remember seeing this video the first week I was at DePauw (I think Kevin showed it to some of us), and I think it is as cool now as I thought it was back then! I've also seen the beatboxing flautist - very nice. I love seeing people use their instruments in new ways - the beauty and expressivity of the instrument's conventional sound is preserved, sometimes even amplified (as in the cello video), while being combined with something that's edgy and modern. Very cool!
ReplyDeleteAs for the "high" vs "low" arts.....part of me wants to agree, and part of me doesn't. I've also heard music described as "the most noble of the arts" and I think I know why....first of all, the "music" referred to above is classical music. I believe the "high" and "low" refers to how much the music brings people together, how hard the performers work, and the general quality of the music produced (quality is such a subjective word, but bear with me). Now, some pop music can be very passionate, insightful, and "noble" (the musicians who I would consider "noble" would hate being classified as "pop musicians"), but if you compare Beethoven's 6th Symphony or Rimsky-Korsakov's "Scheherazade" to "Friday" by Rebecca Black.....do I even have to say it? There's no way Rebecca Black practices for hours a day or makes "quality" music or brings many people together (except those that hate her). I think the line between "high" classical music and "low" pop music is fading slightly, but it mostly depends on what you're comparing.
This is one of the most beautiful performances I've seen. Beautiful in the sense that it was obviously heartfelt from the performer and it was original. I am familiar with Kevin's reference to "high" and "low" art, but I don't think I know enough to define either. Rather than calling it "high" and "low" art, I would say that this video integrates music of different origins - and does it well.
ReplyDeleteDidn't the terms originate from some French guys classifying art several hundred years ago? Regardless, I think the fact that so many of us are unaware of the distinction is a good thing - as a culture perhaps we are finally forgetting it! Hurrah for beat-boxing cellists and all other cross-genre musicking.
ReplyDeleteOh and BTW Christopher Smalls briefly uses the term High and low arts in "musicking" article we read lol
ReplyDelete