Has education expanded your listening tastes?


This point recently came up in another thread: a member was of the opinion (if I am paraphrasing them correctly) that critical thinking plays little role in what our tastes in music might be. We like what we like and that's it. So that begs the question for me, how many of us feel that our reaction to music is primarily rooted in the emotional centers of the brain and that rational analysis of musical structure and language doesn't potentially expand our range of musical enjoyment? I ask because I am not a professional musician, but I did take a few college level music history classes, learn to play guitar in my forties (now sixty,) learn to read music on a rudimentary level of competence, study a little music theory, and enjoy reading historical biographies about composers and musicians. I can honestly say that the in the last fifteen years or so, I have greatly expanded what types of music I enjoy and that I can appreciate music I might not "love" in the emotional sense that used to dictate what I listen to. Take Berg, Schoenberg, and Webern for example. Their music doesn't sweep you away with the emotional majesty of earlier composers, but I find their intellectual rigor and organization to be fascinating and very enjoyable. Same with studying the history of American roots music, I learned a lot about our cultural history and enjoy listening to old blues and country music now. How do other's feel about this emotion vs. learning to appreciate thing?
photon46
Schubert, I think I understand your perspective, but just as relativism is the potential downfall of morality, so is absolutism of values the fossilization of aesthetic practice. In my mind, insisting that base emotions are unworthy inspirations for great art is to consign art to a place of precious near irrelevance. Without the base emotions that inspired Van's Brown Eyed Girl we wouldn't have much of Shakespeare and the plots in many great novels, the art of Egon von Schiele, many Japanese Ukiyo-e prints, some of Monet's paintings and many of the great operas and ballets that are part of our heritage. I don't agree that nothing good comes of being a soldier but I do agree that nothing good has made need of soldiers. Again, innumerable great works of literature, opera, painting, theatre, and film use that dark side of mankind as artistic inspiration.

Rok2id, nothing wrong with people having less than fully informed opinions about art forms they are a fan of. The survival of "elevated" forms of art depend entirely on the sustained interest of the dilettante. We just have to remember Moynihan's adage "everyone is entitled to his own opinions, just not his own facts."
******Rok2id, nothing wrong with people having less than fully informed opinions about art forms they are a fan of.*****

Whew! Am I glad to hear that. Now, please tell it to The Frogman and Learsfool!!!

Cheerrs
Coming from my perspective, that of a Christian, the best is that which leads you closer to the divine reality in a manner that makes you profoundly grateful that God inspired the great soul who created it ,and that you got to hear it and were lead closer to him by it.
Bach's Cantatas being the a prime example.
In the case of the very greatest composers of religious music, like Bach or Monteverdi, it seems as if God infused them rather than inspired them.

There has NEVER been a good war or a bad peace.
The USA has never been in a war that could not have been prevented. God is not pleased that anyone is a soldier.
If you haven't killed anyone personally, don't bother to correct me on this point.
Rok2id, I would love to hear their perspective. I work within a very large University art department with practitioners of many art forms, so I obviously have great respect for the opinions of professional musicians and educators. As educators, we have to find ways to communicate with each other across our particular specialities and hopefully instill love and knowledge of the arts in both students who are arts majors as well as students who are taking arts courses because of graduation requirements. I'm not sure what level of expertise qualifies someone to be worthy of public commentary in your mind, but if educators were to suggest that students keep their mouths shut and their less than fully informed opinions to themselves until they had reached a predetermined level of artistic maturity, we'd not be doing a very good job of educating them by today's standards. I fail to see why adults attempting to educate themselves about an art form should also be relegated to the silent corner unless they pre-qualify as an expert opinion. It's just art we're talking about here, not as if we are risking spreading bad advice about how a disease is spread. I would also advise a slight tempering of reverence for the opinions of art professionals as oracles of absolute truth. I've worked with many artists and known a few composers, people who have been in history and textbooks for decades. They were and are subject to prejudices, biases, and irrational exuberances in spite of having great erudition in their specialty. No disrespect meant to Frogman and Learsfool, just making a general point.
As far as expanding a person's listening tastes (likes / dislikes), Maybe 'Exposure' would be a more appropriate word than 'education'.

I think most people are exposed to music as opposed to being educated about music. Can you dislike a certain music even after being educated about it? I say absolutely. But you cannot stop liking music you love, even after being educated about it.

I feel the education thing is just nice to know. Of course COMPOSERS are exempt from this theory. :) They are the creators and have an entirely different perspective.

Cheers