Hamlet (17:00) Apr 28, 2016 11:15:06 GMT -5
Post by ahinton on Apr 28, 2016 11:15:06 GMT -5
He doesn't. He refers to it, undoubtedly, but because it's as implausible as it would be unwelcome to seek to separate it from artistic creation.
Good grief! I nearly fell off my chair in shock! For once in your life (if I may use that word once more) you've actually identified who "we" are, at least in this context! Might it be likely that you make a habit of this?! I presume that, by "our great Oscar", you do not refer either to Mr Levant or Mr Peterson...
Your Oscar (and yes, I do know to whom you refer) wouldn't be able to see my point in any case, for rather obvious reasons.
On which planet? That really is an absurd statement if I may say so; all artistic creators are humans (not your beloved robots!) who do their work while they're alive and whilst, like all other humans, they all have difference life experiences and respond to what life throws at them and others in subtly different ways, they do not and indeed cannot function in a vacuum, which is just as well, since their artistic creations would otherwise be of precious little value or relevance to the rest of us.
The member (you, I mean) "keeps going on about" Brahms - a fine composer, without doubt and without a good many of whose works I would most certainly not wish to have to live - but were art and life unrelated in any way (as you appear to believe), how could he have (and, for that matter, why did he) compose all the choral works and songs that he did? Are you now considering advocating censure of all non-instrumental music (even by Brahms) on the grounds of its use of words from human language and their expressions of aspects of human life on the grounds of your astonishing belief that art and life are unrelated?
Speaking (or rather writing) as a composer, if I really thought that what I'd done was unrelated to life I'd pick up all my scores and pass them through the shredder prontissimo!