Definitions - music

[french frank]

Courtesy of Amazon - 100 R&B Classics: The Anthems

Only three and a half stars.

I know some people are impatient about linguistic 'quibbles'. But usually the colour spectrum analogy satisfies people. Or 'Which is the odd one out?' four objects, each of which is the odd one, depending on how you define them. You have to live with the flexibility, but each definition has a use. No definition - is just messy.

[Roehre]

... No definition - is just messy.

A definition is by its very meaning meant to be definite.
As I wrote earlier (Msg #32), and as is proven by the contributions to and discussions on this thread, a definition for (classical, etc) music is impossible.

A workable description is the best we can hope for.

[ahinton]

If we're losing the fire in the belly and coming close to agreement on 'There's no definition' / 'Let's agree to disagree', may I attempt to reignite things with this excellent pair of usages (abusages? - there really ought to be such a word!)?

Courtesy of Amazon - 100 R&B Classics: The Anthems




[I've been bitterly disappointed with some of the 'Favourite Anthems' CDs I've bought lately...]

"Us an'them" an' all that, peut-être?...

[Flosshilde]

"'Classic' is used in two senses. In the one it means having permanent interest and value...

So are we attempting to define 'classic' music, rather than 'classical'? Is The Beatles' music (for example) - often described as classic, I believe, of 'permanent interest and value'?

[Flosshilde]

'Which is the odd one out?' four objects, each of which is the odd one, depending on how you define them. You have to live with the flexibility, but each definition has a use. No definition - is just messy.

So there would be no single definition that could encompass everything that might be called 'classical' music?

[Roehre]

So there would be no single definition that could encompass everything that might be called 'classical' music?

No. There isn't.

[Flosshilde]

I didn't think so

[Alison]

Please accept what Mr Roehre has told you.

[Flosshilde]

I thought I had : puzzleemoticon:

& wasn't he agreeing with what I said in my previous post?

[LeMartinPecheur]

So are we attempting to define 'classic' music, rather than 'classical'? Is The Beatles' music (for example) - often described as classic, I believe, of 'permanent interest and value'?

floss: 'we' were, I think, trying to define 'classical music'. In answer to the posted question as to when the phrase first was used I went to the OED and just copied this quote, mainly for its second part. Being a dictionary its focus is mainly on single words rather than 'pairs', and therefore isn't quite focused on our precise issue.

I really wasn't attempting to switch horses in mid-argument!

[Alison]

I thought I had : puzzleemoticon:

& wasn't he agreeing with what I said in my previous post?

Sorry, I was speaking to everyone really! It's not really up to me to stifle the debate; just demonstrating the impatience to which LMP correctly refers ...

[Flosshilde]

No no, I didn't intend to suggest that you were; I was picking up the 'permanent interest & value' aspect of the definition of 'classic' music - something which might be included in a definition of 'classical' music. I've always been a bit bemused by the way 'classical' in the visual arts describes a specific period/style, but in music is used as a general catch-all for a huge range of styles, periods & types/forms (as well as - but less often? - for a specific period).

(replying to no. 70)

[french frank]

So there would be no single definition that could encompass everything that might be called 'classical' music?

I agree with Roehre. But there are still general characteristics which broadly speaking apply. I don't believe there is a 'watertight' definition for any kind of music on which everyone would agree. That is the point of the colour spectrum analogy.

But there are certain contexts where it's necessary to draw up some rules of thumb for particular contexts: like Sc's survey, or placing things in order in a library or shop. You need to have those 'rules', and the fact that some people challenge them is less important than that they know what they are.

I think LMP's reference to 'classic' is a bit of a red herring. It's a different word with different meanings.

[MrGongGong]

But there are certain contexts where it's necessary to draw up some rules of thumb for particular contexts: like Sc's survey, or placing things in order in a library or shop. You need to have those 'rules', and the fact that some people challenge them is less important than that they know what they are.

One of the things which technology facilitates is the ability to have multiple categorisations and ones which don't follow simple logic
SO I might be interested in music that features performers who share my birthday
or by composers who have never seen the sea (the old Beethoven chestnut )
or to categorise music by the pitch of the first sound
or to have music arranged by some entirely arbitrary rule.....

If the supermarket was arranged by colour you would still be able to find the red peppers (they would be near to the Merlot)

[Richard Barrett]

As Roehre says, there's no definition of classical music. (I would say the term doesn't even need to be used. I don't use it if I can possibly help it, which is almost all of the time. "Is what you write classical music?" No.)

But by the same token there's no hard and fast definition of any musical "genre": jazz, pop, folk, progressive rock, darkcore jungle or whatever. Even in mathematics, generally considered to be a more exact discpline than music, there can no general theory which is both consistent and complete. There's no hard and fast definition of music for heaven's sake. I don't think the "rules of thumb" referred to by FF are actually necessary any more - as MrGG says, the way that everything now is multiply indexed means you can invent your own selection criteria whenever you want to.