Why do some people have this idea that art is about emotion? That paintings, music and fiction of high caliber have as their primary purpose to convey or elicit emotions? And why do some people have this idea that having an emotional response to art is somehow the "white" thing to do? Ridiculous. Ideas are a higher domain of the mind than emotion. The whole reason why many people can't appreciate classical music and it feels empty and sterile to them is because they are creatures of emotion while classical music is cerebral, it's in a domain higher than emotion. Go back to your jazz if you care about emotions.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JbLPTVvryg
You might be autistic. It’s okay.
>>18602711not an argumenthttps://youtu.be/U3Jm8zF7bJ8?&t=2857
Ideas are tools, used by the agency of life, which is emotional.
>>18602717Your rambling doesn’t deserve an argument. You’re not going to understand why emotions are important anyway. It’ll be like arguing with a brick wall.>classical music and it feels empty and sterile to themThis line in particular betrays how little you understand this subject. Classical music is the most emotion-evoking music. It excels because it can stir emotions without words. Elements of classical music are used to this day in movies to create a feeling in the audience. The emotion of a scene completely changes when the music is changed or removed. If you don’t feel emotion from classical music, you can’t be helped. Like I said, you’re just autistic.
>>18602737>Hollywood soundtracks are classical musicfuck off fucking retard
>>18602684>Why do some people have this idea that art is about emotion?Because the arts are at their essence symbolic and one of the use cases of symbols is conveying or eliciting emotions, which penetrate much deeper than intellectual messages. And because it is one of the things people proveably make art to do. It's not a secret.>And why do some people have this idea that having an emotional response to art is somehow the "white" thing to do? Because those people are sending you a social status signal, not an argument. Being brown is low status, hence if X is brown then X is low status; they are telling you that you shouldn't do X unless you want to be low status, which humans normally don't want to do. It's a social signal, not rational proposition.>Ideas are a higher domain of the mind than emotion.They are complementary, for the most part. The separation between the two was a fairly minoritarian position for most of history.> classical music and it feels empty and sterile1: Those criticisms are superficial and do not get into what they actually dislike about that type of music. Length, complexity, lack of lyrics. As a previous anon said, that tradition is still used to evoke emotions in television, documentaries, and cinema.2: If you can listen to any opera and not feel at least a little emotionally aroused there is just something wrong with you. It's not an argument, but how am I supposed to argue with you about qualia you just don't experience? That entire avenue of human experience is alien to you and there is nothing more to be said about it.
>>18602757classical pieces frequently get used in film, and not only by hollywood tho
>>18602684>The whole reason why many people can't appreciate classical music and it feels empty and sterile to them is because they are creatures of emotion while classical music is cerebral, it's in a domain higher than emotion.Get a load of this dumb bugman, who literally can't appreciate classical music and openly admits it as if it were the highest virtue, trying to talk down to other people.
>>18602835>who literally can't appreciate classical musiclearn to read, fuckface
>>18602839OP literally admits he's unable to experience the emotions classical music is intended to evoke, just like the normies he's trying to criticize.
>>18602845I said "many people can't appreciate classical music", I didn't say that I can't appreciate classical music, fucking retard, learn to fucking read.
>>18602757>This retard is trying to claim that Handel's Sarabande is not classical music
See how anon is flying off the handle in abject rage for no logical reason? Guess art is pretty emotional!
>>18602850If you can appreciate classical music, why are you denying the fact that it (like all decent art) is intended to evoke emotions? You're a low-IQ bugman. You're confusing the primitive satisfaction you get out of the delusion that you "understand" music you can't even hear for inhabiting a higher cerebral domain. This is truly pathetic.
>>18602864stfu and learn to stop psychologizing, study logic, fuckwithttps://youtu.be/U3Jm8zF7bJ8?&t=2857
Putting the 80 IQ bugman aside, the bottom line of this thread is that if you're listening to Beethoven's Cavatina but you're not feeling the emotions it's clearly intended to convey, you by definition do not understand the music, because you can't relate the logical structure of what you're "hearing" to its intended psychoacoustic effects, putting you in exactly the same boat as those who perceive it as sterile and fail to see its point.
>>18602890>you>you>you>I'm not psychologizing btwagain, fuck off and study logic
>>18602890obviously, but it's the current year, so let the "special" people be proud about their "superpowers" (disabilities)
You can tell OP is a brainlet who never did musical analysis because he thinks classical is more elaborate than jazz
>>18602904Probably because he uses the term "classical music" like a normie who can't distinguish Classical-era music from Baroque.
>>18602904not OP but it is
>not OP but it isHoly Mother of All Brainlets
>>18602914you can get 5 strangers together and if they're knowledgable and talented enough they can bang out decent jazz on the spotyou will never get the same with classical chamber music
>>18602918>you can get 5 strangers together and if they're knowledgable and talented enough they can bang out decent jazz on the spotThe same 5 could also bang out passable classical on the first try and decent classical if they do it routinely.
>>18602684>Ideas are a higher domain of the mind than emotion.This is central to your argument and you make no attempt to try and prove it. You merely assume it a priori and mean to make us disprove it. This is not how discourse works. So see >>18602711
Both Jazz and classical can be incredibly simple or incredibly complex. But classical music at it's most complex is more difficult and complex than jazz, it's not even a competition. Jazz doesn't have anything close to Liszt's or Brahms' most virtuoso pieces. Obviously if you compare Petzold's Menuet or Fur Elise to anything by Miles Davis Jazz its more complex, but that's not a fair comparisson.
>>18602711The vast majority of extremely exceptional people in human history were European men with aspergers.
>>18602930>discourseBrown drivel
>>18602930It's a false dichotomy in any case. Are the awe and joy a sensitive and intelligent listener feels when he grasps some of the genius of a musical piece not themselves part of the "higher domain" of deep musical comprehension? Where else would they belong? OP is a total pseud.
>>18602935>But classical music at it's most complex is more difficult and complex than jazzOk, but jazz at its most complex is more complex than classical at its most complex, while "decent" jazz tends to be more complex than "decent" classical. You're an imbecile.>at it's most complex>that's not a fair comparisson.Unironically get sterilized.
>>18602953There's no point arguing with you since you're already switched to "nuh-huh!" name calling modeYou're either a nigger and chimping out or you fell for a meme. I doubt you're even a musician
>>18602953>jazz at its most complex is more complex than classical at its most complex, while "decent" jazz tends to be more complex than "decent" classical.true by every objective metric. but then again, 20 monkeys banging on a keyboard for 20 minutes is more complex than either of them by any objective metric. how is complexity even a relevant metric here? >>18602904 was intelligent enough to use the word 'elaborate' but op doesn't know the difference
okay so op is obviously a retard who's emotionally lashing out because he got his art opinions from social media. but it's true that art doesn't HAVE to be about emotion, surely? most is, sure, maybe even all truly great art is. but art can be an expression of skill as well, displaying complexity and conquering more difficult challenges can be artistic even if it isn't meant to evoke a particular emotional reaction... right?
>>18604642It doesn't have to be, obviously. Gibbon's Decline and fall of the Roman empire is an artistically impressive book that is not mainly dedicated to expressing emotions, for example. Literature especially has many examples of books like this. I think Joyce's Ulysses qualifies, for example.
