RE: [F_minor] intentionalist fallacy yadda yadda

[James Wright <gzarlino@hotmail.com>]

Amen Bob.  And again I say Amen!James K. Wright, Ph.D.
Professor (Music Theory and Composition)& Supervisor of Performance StudiesSchool for Studies in Art & Culture: MusicCarleton University, OttawaJames_Wright@carleton.ca(613) 520-2600 (ext. 3734)



> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 10:27:13 -0500> From: bobmerk@earthlink.net> Subject: [F_minor] intentionalist fallacy yadda yadda> To: F_MINOR@email.rutgers.edu> > Re: the Gouldian 'hum' (bug). (Which I will admit I like but..)> > How about the intentionalist fallacy. The intention of the artist is not the only valid reading.> > ==============> > Hmmm, I smell a Deconstructionist.> > Well, sure, you pays your $12, and that entitles you to have your very own interpretation of Shakespeare's "Hamlet" or GG's Goldbergs, and nobody can take that away from you. (In the movies they say: The projectionist has the final cut.)> > But to elevate the role of the reader or the listener or the museum browser to the equivalent role of the artist ... to teach graduate seminars and award masters degrees in why the reader of Faulkner is every bit as significant as Faulkner ...> > It implies a future in which Wikipedia will have a wiki about Glenn Gould, followed by 2.5 million wikis of everyone who ever listened to Glenn Gould, and what each of them thinks of his/her listening experience. Glenn Gould's '55 Goldbergs as Eileen Brookmeyer heard them.> > The only reason some things get fixed fairly permanently in culture is because they were created by a megalomaniacal control-freak artist who wished to touch an audience, but who knew that the only way he/she could achieve that was entirely and exclusively through the artist's personal intentions.> > Of interpretations other than the artist's, we traditionally have some use for and pay some attention to reviewers and critics. From memory alone, name four great music critics of the 19th century. Name four beloved music, art or literature critics of the 20th century. Permanence and greatness seem, by the wishes and preferences of consumers themselves, to elude these temporarily useful people. It's the artist who has a shot at enduring.> > You can label anything a fallacy, but that doesn't make it fallacious.> > Bob M / Massachusetts USA> _______________________________________________> F_min
@email.rutgers.edu> https://email.rutgers.edu/mailman/listinfo/f_minor_______________________________________________
F_minor mailing list
F_minor@email.rutgers.edu
https://email.rutgers.edu/mailman/listinfo/f_minor