hm: "..tried to answer that question", not "answet aht". :p
KS
2009/5/15 kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]>
> well, David, I tried to answet aht question to the best of my
> abilities/conceptions somewhere around this thread. but I'm used to being
> ignored.
>
> KS
>
> 2009/5/14 David Bircumshaw <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Seriously, Judy, I really do think that this discussion from the start has
>> had the same problem that continually bedevils discussions about 'theory'
>> in
>> literature: what is meant by theory in the first place? I try to find out
>> and end up holding a cloud. It's not that I think theory is impossible in
>> literature nor that I think it undesirable, I just don't seem to see any
>> theories being proposed whenever theory in literature is discussed.
>> best
>>
>> dave
>>
>> 2009/5/13 Judy Prince <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>> > Which Shaksper wrote MNT?
>> >
>> > 2009/5/13 David Bircumshaw <[log in to unmask]>
>> >
>> > > It is clear to me that the general drift of comments in this thread
>> > display
>> > > an absence of a defined theory of the nature of theory, without which
>> > > theory, theory theoretically cannot theorised or theoretically be, in
>> > > theory
>> > > or not.
>> > > In A Midsummer Night's Theme we see what can happen if you cavort with
>> > the
>> > > theories.
>> > >
>> > > 2009/5/13 Judy Prince <[log in to unmask]>
>> > >
>> > > > And then there's The Best, Art Tatum:
>> > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYcZGPLAnHA&feature=related
>> > > > Judy
>> > > >
>> > > > 2009/5/13 Douglas Barbour <[log in to unmask]>
>> > > >
>> > > > > I admit that I may be wrong in thinking that music theory & poetic
>> > > theory
>> > > > > arent quite the same thing. I'd respond to this John, by saying
>> that
>> > a
>> > > > lot
>> > > > > of the 'theory' can only be learned by reding the poems, & then
>> > trying
>> > > to
>> > > > > write the way that excites you most, not copying others' poem
>> exactly
>> > > so
>> > > > > much as seeing how those poems do what they do. And to see that,
>> one
>> > > must
>> > > > > read poems, a lot of them.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Which is a bit like paying a lot, while also asking questions,
>> like
>> > > that
>> > > > > one Miles asked Dizzy.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Doug
>> > > > > On 13-May-09, at 9:43 AM, John Herbert Cunningham wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Until recently, Dominic, all the great composers were known as
>> great
>> > > > >> improvisers - Bach Beethoven, Mozart, etc. This meant that they
>> were
>> > > > able
>> > > > >> to
>> > > > >> play by ear and, in fact, because of this skill, they were able
>> to
>> > > > notate
>> > > > >> what they heard in their heads. Many composers these days
>> compose
>> > via
>> > > > >> mathematical algorithms so I cannot say anything about their
>> ability
>> > > to
>> > > > >> hear
>> > > > >> music. As to Jazz, Andrew, it used to be the case that there was
>> a
>> > > > certain
>> > > > >> amount of pride in jazz musicians saying that they were
>> untutored.
>> > > > Recent
>> > > > >> investigations and writing on the early and later jazz giants
>> > > indicating
>> > > > >> that most of them were schooled in theory. Dizzy Gillespie and
>> > Charlie
>> > > > >> Parker would talk for hours about chords and structure. The
>> > legendary
>> > > > >> cutting sessions in Kansas City and the same type of sessions in
>> New
>> > > > York
>> > > > >> required musicians to be able to modulate their way through
>> complex
>> > > > >> chordal
>> > > > >> patterns. Legend has it that Ornette Coleman taught himself
>> theory
>> > > while
>> > > > >> operating an elevator in L.A. The joke that others were to tell
>> is
>> > > that
>> > > > he
>> > > > >> got it wrong. This doesn't really matter much as he went on to
>> > create
>> > > > his
>> > > > >> own harmelodic theory. So whether classical or jazz, if you want
>> to
>> > > > >> compose
>> > > > >> then you'd better have your chops down. I think the same works
>> for
>> > > > >> poetry.
>> > > > >> The better a poet you become, the more you've paid attention to
>> > > literary
>> > > > >> theory and the more poetry reflecting this theory you've read
>> never
>> > > mind
>> > > > >> the
>> > > > >> time spent trying to figure out what another poet is saying and
>> > what
>> > > > the
>> > > > >> thing is in the way that say it that makes that poem and poet
>> > > effective.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Douglas Barbour
>> > > > > [log in to unmask]
>> > > > >
>> > > > > http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/<http://www.ualberta.ca/%7Edbarbour/>
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Latest books:
>> > > > > Continuations (with Sheila E Murphy)
>> > > > > http://www.uap.ualberta.ca/UAP.asp?LID=41&bookID=664
>> > > > > Wednesdays'
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> http://abovegroundpress.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-from-aboveground-press_10.html
>> > > > >
>> > > > > and this is 'life' and we owe at least this much
>> > > > > contemplation to our western fact: to Rise,
>> > > > > Decline, Fall, to futility and larks,
>> > > > > to the bright crustaceans of the oversky.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Phyllis Webb
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > David Bircumshaw
>> > > "Nothing can be done in the face
>> > > of ordinary unhappiness" - PP
>> > > Website and A Chide's Alphabet
>> > > http://www.staplednapkin.org.uk
>> > > The Animal Subsides http://www.arrowheadpress.co.uk/books/animal.html
>> > > Leicester Poetry Society: http://www.poetryleicester.co.uk
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> David Bircumshaw
>> "Nothing can be done in the face
>> of ordinary unhappiness" - PP
>> Website and A Chide's Alphabet
>> http://www.staplednapkin.org.uk
>> The Animal Subsides http://www.arrowheadpress.co.uk/books/animal.html
>> Leicester Poetry Society: http://www.poetryleicester.co.uk
>>
>
>
|