The Challenge of "Culture"

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I go both ways on lyrics vs melody. As a dance music fan I love really cheesy lyrics that mean nearly nothing but are fun to belt. But I also adore singer songwriter stuff in the tradition of Dylan. I have found, however, that even the best lyric can't save a song with a crappy tune. In the end the sound trumps all.

[€uroMeinke]

For me it's Wan Women Vocals that sell me on a song - plus points if there's an accent.

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

I think one of the reasons so many people avoid "highbrow" is that it's difficult to simply enjoy it without studying it.

And that's sort of how I feel about "pop culture" (and I use that definition loosly). I don't get it without studying to try and figure out why it is entertaining, thoughtful, useful, funny, etc....... and then I find it just doesn't hold my attention or compell me in any way - for the most part. But, I like the challenge of odd stuff that makes me work.

And then sometimes I like what is considered.

But, I don't have a general highbrow/lowbrow definition in my vocabulary of understanding. I like what I like and have a decent background of experience to build upon so it is fun for me to streach. Although, I get stuck in the snob category quite a bit for what I respond to. Oh well......

[€uroMeinke]

I'm not sure about the whole highbrow/lowbrow thing. I understand that there are communities, disciplins, and institutions that can make certain cultural elements forboding - but by and large most "good" art was popular in some way.

Now, I guess there are books and works that make reference to others, and the enjoyment of those works are enhanced by having that knowledge, but I think any work despite it's brow-level usually can stand on it's own.

So I can read Candide and not know about Leibnitz, logical postitivists, or the history of the Porteguese earthquake of whatever date it was. Granted if I do, I may get a bit more out of it - but it's still a pleasure to read none-the-less - or I think so anyway.

I suppose another element of great works is that people like to talk about them, speculate, theorize, draw connections, etc. Often that is what the "art" community is all about - much like the fan base of a popular work.

Similarly, I can't read music or play an instrument but I enjoy lots of different forms of music, including classical. I listen and either I respond, or I don't. Sometimes my response evolves over time.

When I first heard Philip Glass, I couldn't get past its repetativeness but over time I found his music stuck with me and I started seeking him out and ultimately found his work quite compelling. Maybe I wasn't ready for him when I first heard him, but I nver went out of my way to study minimalism or his musical predicessors - rather I think over time my way of listening changed.

[lindyhop]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

I'm not sure about the whole highbrow/lowbrow thing. I understand that there are communities, disciplins, and institutions that can make certain cultural elements forboding - but by and large most "good" art was popular in some way.

Now, I guess there are books and works that make reference to others, and the enjoyment of those works are enhanced by having that knowledge, but I think any work despite it's brow-level usually can stand on it's own.

When I was attending the Long Beach Symphony I always took advantage of the pre-concert lectures. Just about every symphony orchestra offers these programs but Long Beach is unique because so many people attend (guest conductors are always stunned by the crowd). Usually they talk about the composers and preview some of the main themes of the music and that's helpful when you're hearing something for the first time. But when there was a piece of music that really connected with me it never depended on what I knew about it ahead of time because I wasn't hearing it with my conscious mind, instead my whole body "heard" it. That's not going to happen with every piece of music (no matter what style) but the more open you are the more likely it will.

So I can read Candide and not know about Leibnitz, logical postitivists, or the history of the Porteguese earthquake of whatever date it was. Granted if I do, I may get a bit more out of it - but it's still a pleasure to read none-the-less - or I think so anyway.

A great piece of art should be accessible without knowing all the background, that's what makes it timeless. Of course there may be language or culture issues that we have to get past.

I suppose another element of great works is that people like to talk about them, speculate, theorize, draw connections, etc. Often that is what the "art" community is all about - much like the fan base of a popular work.

I was a literature major at one point but I never quite fit in because I read for enjoyment and I never enjoyed the analysis of symbolism and all that other stuff. I read Dante's Inferno for a class and later read Purgatorio and Paradiso on my own. I loved Purgatorio, I thought it was the most human of the three and honestly I thought parts of it were hilarious. Later when I went back to school I had a chance to take a class where we were going to read Purgatorio and I was so excited to be able to share it with a group of people. But the way we had to read and interpret the book pretty much killed it for me. If your only exposure to the classics has been through school then I can understand why you might never want to try them again.

Similarly, I can't read music or play an instrument but I enjoy lots of different forms of music, including classical. I listen and either I respond, or I don't. Sometimes my response evolves over time.

When I first heard Philip Glass, I couldn't get past its repetativeness but over time I found his music stuck with me and I started seeking him out and ultimately found his work quite compelling. Maybe I wasn't ready for him when I first heard him, but I nver went out of my way to study minimalism or his musical predicessors - rather I think over time my way of listening changed.

This so true, sometimes we just aren't ready for something. I read The Great Gatsby in college and it was a big yawn. I read it again a few years ago and I was amazed how much the book had improved in that time. It was the book that changed, right?

[€uroMeinke]

In chatting some more about this last night, I realized I seldom do any "research" before accessing a work. Rather, I come to a work and it inspires me to learn more about it, place it into context, learn about the influences, etc. I guess I'm just curious in that way.

Maybe this also points out different ways of thinking. When we went to the MOCA exhibit, some people would read the catalogue first before viewing the art, to get a better understanding of what they are about (much like the pre-concert talks). Whereas I looked at the art first, and read the copy later.

[Not Afraid]

We also tend to go into our the audience of the dance performances we attend without doing much research and then, follow it up with a post performance talk with the company, reading the program notes or doing further research at home. Although, now we often have at least a minimal context for the stuff we seem to see.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

I seem to have a tendency to bring up jazz a lot when I talk about art. Probably, it is simply because it is one of the artforms that I have the most familiarity with and the best personal understanding of. So I guess I'll bring it up again in the hopes that it adds something to the discussion of appreciation of art at different levels.

Jazz is something that you usually love or hate. I'm not talking Kenny G. pop jazz, but the far less accessable Coltrane, Monk, or Parker type of jazz. Much of it can be heard as noise or as magnificent, depending on the listener, but there are also many different levels of appreciation in between those two extremes.

For some, they just like the sounds of the piano or the light, bouncy, elements of the rhythm. Others might appreciate the underlying melody that is being suggestively danced around by the lead instrument and how the melody is implied, rather than explicitly stated. On an even deeper level, one might appreciate how the chord structure itself is cleverly implied through the use of chord substitution. There are so many levels to the appreciation but whether one has the ear and knowledge to dissect the intricacies or rather, just enjoys the toe tapping feeling that they get from the song, there is plenty of room for everyone to find something about it that they enjoy. The trick is to give it a chance and try to keep your mind open. The level that you wish to try to understand and relate is up to you but that doesn't mean that it can't be enjoyed at a variety of different levels.

I assume that the artforms I am less familiar with have similar aspects. I love paintings and photography and sculpture and dance but I don't understand all of them enough to develop a deep appreciation of them. There is still a lot of stuff that speaks to me and evokes emotion, even from my "lowbrow" perspective.

[Gemini Cricket]

For me, the Opera sometimes bores me if they don't supply you with a translation if it is in a foreign tongue. Most especially when it's one I am not familiar with. 'La Boheme' I could sit through without a translation.

Classical music is wonderful but I have fallen asleep during a couple of concerts. I guess it is lack of some sort of storyline or plot. I know that's pretty pathetic of me, but I need that often.

Ballet and dance concerts are fun to watch sometimes, but that to leaves me feeling bored if it is a piece I don't connect to.

The majority of the opera performances, classical music concerts and dance concerts I have been to I went because I knew someone involved with the production. On my own, I'm not sure if I'd go.

Money is also a factor. Tickets can be pricey.

Also at any function, if I find the crowd too bourgeois*, I begin to detest the particular function I'm at.

*I don't know if that's how you spell it. I've said it lots and lots but I think this is the first time I spelled out the word... (It sounds like: boozh-wa)

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

Also at any function, if I find the crowd too bourgeois*, I begin to detest the particular function I'm at.

Heh, regardless of function I always enjoy watching the corwd, I always like to make up storeis (for good and bad) how each got to the same place we're at.