Judging Music Purely As Music

Good way to do this is keep listening to sounds you never heard and seek out situations where you might find them rather than programming your own soundtrack. It can be as simple as walking into your local grocers and standing there listening idly to whatever Asian or Middle Eastern or African or whatever cassette he has on for as long as you can get away with. Don't ask him who it is either, because remembering the 'artist' or 'title' is step one to incorporating extra-musical influences into your thinking, and finding out same in order to puurchase is step one to becoming a collector.

Also, if you must buy stuff, establish different reasons for buying stuff than you previously did. Limit yourself to records that can only be purchased in a particular shop, for example, or restrict yourself to a small selection of labels. Buy only things you would also gladly buy your parole officer, or somebody you want to shag. Anything really.

I think Jack R has a point - in that he acknowledges the (probable) impossibility of what he's advocating, but still maintains it as a possible regulative ideal. That might be no bad thing.

I wonder whether another argument can be made - vs people (including me!) who take the 'There's no such thing as Music Purely As Music' line - that there's also no such thing as Music Purely Not As Music? (cor - one for the Derrida thread...)

It's a dull, unimaginative and thankfully completely unrealistic attitude. Nothing exists without context. Nothing. Judging music on 'music' alone is an oxymoron: what leads you to make that core judgement initially?

Wot Jerry said. Image, interviews, hype, sleeve design, the whole extratextual whatsit - all part of the FUN.

Nothing exists without context.

This is especially true for popular music, though I would argue that some forms of classical music at least attempt to transcend context. However, I tend to agree with that point, if for no other reason than the music had to have existed within a context at one point because somebody had to write it!

I don't think it's an either/or situation. There's no reason why music and context can't--or shouldn't--coexist. Neither exists to service the other, but (to paraphrase Saussard on language) both come together like the front and back of a piece of paper. Both are independent things, but when you cut one, you cut the other.

'Context' is often a mirage, and as you can see here, it's at first seductive and then tyrannical.

But hey, give the geezer Redelfs a break - he wasn't saying, Music exists without context - he was saying (I think - maybe): Let's see if we can imagine a hypothetically decontextualized way of talking / writing about music. In other words, the absence of context would be a flagrant fiction - but might be as enabling a fiction as any other imagined context.

I don't know, I would consider this akin to writing about music "objectively" -- a very difficult thing to do, because people's opinions tend to be coloured by their past experiences, opinions and prejuidices. Though people can try to suppress such feelings when judging works of art, I think it shows up at some level, whether conciously or subconciously. That's why I find the idea of objective criticism dishonest or suspicious at best.

Even if all music were delivered in blank packets with no outside information (such as interviews, videos, etc.) about the makers I could see this being a problem.

But Nicole, I'm not talking about being "objective." Whatever the heck that is.

My point was that I think it's lazy and frivolous to dismiss the _music_ created by bands or artists because because of _non-musical_ factors, like their attitude or politics or poor fashion sense. I say this with the caveat that it isn't possible to be totally unprejudiced in this respect.

Now, as far as the _music_ is concerned, you can be as prejudiced as you want, ie. dismissing any band with a decent lead guitarist as "dadrock." I don't see what use an unbiased critic would be.

This doesn't work with live acts, cuz you're always going to be reacting to choices the band makes about what color hiphuggers to wear that night, which chorus to do the swinging leg kick to, etc. - SO is live music not as good as recorded music because our senses deceive us?

(NB: when radios became widespread in the 30s it was predicted that the era of political ideology was over: no longer could politicians use "rhetorical tricks" and body language to deceive their audiences)

Yes, but surely "the music" would come down to a set of notes on a piece of paper? Any extra influence includes stuff like what instruments they used, their various techniques of equalisation, etc.

Heh heh - I actually consider SOUND music's driving force...