Interesting point there, moey, which actually links into something I've been thinking about as far as this thread's concerned.
The functionality of music can be all sorts of things, as various people have said (from attentive concert hall listening to hearing a tune on the radio whilst washing up). I think the beauty of it is that it's an artform which allows the imagination a lot of space and is open enough not to demand constant, rigid attention. Pop tunes are designed to be immediate, and generally not deeply analysed. Some forms of prog/ classical etc beg for repeated listens with a great deal of intellectual input.
Moey's mention of Eno's ambient way of listening leads me to ask how dance music fits in with the idea that only many, many attentive listenings can mean the listener has heard the recording properly. Dance music is listened to by people in altered states of consciousness, with lots of distracting lights, people etc, and often only heard once. This is actually the primary intended function of dance music. The very fleetingness of it is part of its appeal. The same goes for pop music, which is often marketed to be infectious even when listened to in passing, without chin-scratching attention. What about punk (or Eno's 'idiot energy' music) - intended to be immediate without deep intellectualising? Although I'd go further and say that the artist's original intentions aren't necessarily that relevant once they've released a recording. If the listener misses 'the point', so what? If they're getting something else out of it by interpreting it in a different way that satisfies them, fine. The point I made about dance music also makes me wonder if listening to any type of music on drugs would be considered 'listening to it properly', as perception is altered. Surely by all this logic listening to psychedelic music NOT tripping means you're not listening to it 'properly'.
Let's face it, listening to music can never become an objective thing. You only have to read the sleeve notes to most classical recordings to realise what a sterile path that can lead to - what someone (can't remember who) once called 'So-What' criticism. The fact that we all like different music shows how differently we all hear it. Listening to a pop song on the radio whilst washing up, dancing whilst off your tits in a club to a banging tune and sitting stock-still infront of a HiFi listening to that Holy Grail prog album for the 500th time in a row with a furrowed brow are all valid ways of listening to music. There's nothing wrong with fleeting listening and it doesn't mean the music isn't being listened to properly at all.
That's my 2p's-worth on the subject. Enough already.
|
