In an art essay discussion group at the Contemporary Arts Museum Houston, we recently discoursed over the concept of "pilgrimage" to view, experience, and have an aesthetic experience with a work. The author was mainly citing works that are site specific, meaning, those that cannot be moved out of the space in which they currently exist for either physical reasons or due to aesthetic loss due to spatial context.For better or for worse, I tend to always correlate my understanding of visual art to how I conceptualize musical syntax. I made a comparison that looking at the Mona Lisa is like listening to Beethoven, while looking (or visiting) Nancy Holt's Sun Tunels (pictured here) is like listening to John Cage. The latter asks the participant to play a more active role in the interaction with the work in order to appreciate it, understand it and respond appropriately and aesthetically. They are also site and time specific. Meaning, the interpretation of the work is dependent on the circumstances and the space at that particular time. On retrospect, I should have also listed George Crumb.
At the risk of sounding elitist (which I did), I responded at the suggestion that some would find Beethoven's music boring. In that case I proposed, there would most likely be a lack of understanding and knowledge of his musical language and syntax. I equate this to someone saying they don't get Shakespeare. Let me clarify that I do not believe that all types of music can be thought of as language, just like not all art is dependent upon its surroundings and context for interpretation, appreciation and understanding.
On my way home I came up with the following understanding and appreciation metaphor. Let's think of a Beethoven Symphony as an Italian (or any foreign) film. We can:
1. Watch it without sound
This to me would be the equivalent of hearing it for the first time without any prior knowledge of classical music syntax, whether conscious or unconscious. There would be some basic understanding of the story line by visual depiction only but a lot of the nuances, themes, secondary plots, and sounds that are not related to the picture would be missed. Also, certain parts would make completely sense while others would remain a undecipherable. I also compare this to reading only sections of a book at random and trying to get full understanding from this experiment. Being that music occurs at a specific moment, it would be quite understandable that the viewer would tune in and out and miss key components that add to the character and plot development.
2. Watch it with sound but with no knowledge of the language or one related to (like spanish and Italian)
I consider this like hearing it and being familiar with classical music in general terms. In this case, external sounds and general speech nuances will give us a better understanding of the expression behind the meaning. Certain sounds are universal. We can easily identify certain emotions but in some cases, without understanding their raison d'être. Scenes where language is used mainly for plot development will be completely lost. In relation to music, this would be like not being able to recognize a theme and its variations.
3. Watch it with subtitles
I equate this to knowing basic music syntax, music theory harmony and general musical forms. Although appreciation can happen at the above levels, I believe true understanding perhaps begins here. Still, we miss the nuances of the original language, missing any specific idiosyncratic linguistic attributes that are lost in translation.
4. Watch it with full command of the academic version of the language
A full grasp, command, and understanding of tonal systems, perhaps with a lack of historical context of the norms of the time period, this is like understanding academically every line in the movie, but missing colloquialisms that may (or may not) enhance its communicative efficacy.
5. Watch it with full command of the colloquial language and its context
Perhaps this is where understanding, appreciating, interpreting, and aesthetic interaction meet. Although this is perhaps an utopian idea, it is the place to strive for to decipher and understand Beethoven's syntax. I think those that have experienced it on period instruments could attest for the difference in sound and affect this imposes on the performer and listener.
I am reminded myself of the many times when I am sitting next to my better half, who speaks several languages, watching television in an idiom I do not understand, stopping and asking every 5 seconds: what are they saying? What is happening? I am sure he finds this extremely annoying. I grasp somethings, but most is lost. With movies being mostly representational (you recognize concretely what you see) and music being mainly symbolic (through abstracting expression), I think it would be easy to adopt a feeling of appreciation without understanding.
I am reminded of Partner's in Building (a Houston custom builder) website a year or so ago. The flash site started with a series of exterior and interior pictures of their product with an instrumental version of Madonna's "Ray of Light." Those not familiar with the lyrics of the song, would miss that the chorus repeats "and I feel like I just got home." I would argue without this knowledge one would miss a rather large part of the presentation's message.
Am I being elitist by suggesting the same with music? Or perhaps just realistic?
