Poetry’s relationship to language seems analogous to atonal jazz’s relationship to music, and abstract art’s relationship to art. I’m not a fan of any of those (although I do enjoy the occasional weird progressive rock song), but it would be interesting to see how well liking one predicts liking another, or how well intelligence in a domain predicts interest in its more esoteric works.
I agree with Michael that you may be confusing poetry with modernist poetry. In particular, poetry is a more constrained, more beauty-focused form of language, whereas abstract art and jazz and atonal jazz are less constrained, less beauty-focused forms of art and music.
My analogy would be modernist poetry: poetry :: abstract art: art.
In particular, poetry is a more constrained, more beauty-focused form of language, whereas abstract art and jazz and atonal jazz are less constrained, less beauty-focused forms of art and music.
Ouch. I’m generally a fan of your posts, Yvain, but this remark makes me wince.
To quote Milton Babbitt (regarding composers who claimed not to be “using a system”), ignorance of constraint does not imply absence of constraint. The particular constraints that are operative in jazz or abstract art may not be immediately apparent to the outsider, but that doesn’t mean they’re not there.
Also, to say that certain art forms are “less beauty-focused” comes dangerously close to a rhetorical shot. There are exceptions, but as a general rule it’s safe to say that the practitioners of any art are seeking to create beautiful works. To a first approximation, art:beauty::rationality:truth.
Finally, let me caution everyone that “atonal” is a technical term that really ought not to be bandied around by people without a background in music. In particular, it does not mean “unfamiliar-sounding music I don’t like”, as it sometimes seems to in some quarters. (I’m not accusing anyone in particular of doing this, just a general warning.)
You’ve figured me out. I have no musical background whatsoever and am making judgments solely based on my superficial untrained perception. I should probably stop that.
I have heard many abstract artists condemn art that is too focused on beauty as naive and unworthy of a true artist, and support art that makes philosophical or political points instead, but I don’t know for sure that all abstract artists are like this.
Poetry is ancient. You sure you don’t mean modern (or rather, postmodern) poetry?
Anyway, I like abstract visual art, poetry, and modern prose literature, but I’m fairly unsophisticated musically despite my professional interest in it. From a neuropsychological perspective all arts are very interesting but abstract visual art seems to have made the most progress.
I like abstract visual art, poetry, and modern prose literature, but I’m fairly unsophisticated musically
This is an all too common pattern. Music appears to be the most difficult, most abstract art form (evidently that is part of its attraction for me). This is evidenced not only by the numerous cases I have encountered of otherwise intellectually sophisticated people being musically unsophisticated, but also by the historical development of music, which has tended to lag behind the other arts. (For example, for musicians the “Romantic period” refers to the period from about 1820 to 1910; I remember being shocked to learn that the early 19th century was the tail end of romanticism in other arts, such as literature.)
Poetry’s relationship to language seems analogous to atonal jazz’s relationship to music, and abstract art’s relationship to art. I’m not a fan of any of those (although I do enjoy the occasional weird progressive rock song), but it would be interesting to see how well liking one predicts liking another, or how well intelligence in a domain predicts interest in its more esoteric works.
I like poetry but dislike jazz and abstract art.
I agree with Michael that you may be confusing poetry with modernist poetry. In particular, poetry is a more constrained, more beauty-focused form of language, whereas abstract art and jazz and atonal jazz are less constrained, less beauty-focused forms of art and music.
My analogy would be modernist poetry: poetry :: abstract art: art.
Ouch. I’m generally a fan of your posts, Yvain, but this remark makes me wince.
To quote Milton Babbitt (regarding composers who claimed not to be “using a system”), ignorance of constraint does not imply absence of constraint. The particular constraints that are operative in jazz or abstract art may not be immediately apparent to the outsider, but that doesn’t mean they’re not there.
Also, to say that certain art forms are “less beauty-focused” comes dangerously close to a rhetorical shot. There are exceptions, but as a general rule it’s safe to say that the practitioners of any art are seeking to create beautiful works. To a first approximation, art:beauty::rationality:truth.
Finally, let me caution everyone that “atonal” is a technical term that really ought not to be bandied around by people without a background in music. In particular, it does not mean “unfamiliar-sounding music I don’t like”, as it sometimes seems to in some quarters. (I’m not accusing anyone in particular of doing this, just a general warning.)
You’ve figured me out. I have no musical background whatsoever and am making judgments solely based on my superficial untrained perception. I should probably stop that.
I have heard many abstract artists condemn art that is too focused on beauty as naive and unworthy of a true artist, and support art that makes philosophical or political points instead, but I don’t know for sure that all abstract artists are like this.
Poetry is ancient. You sure you don’t mean modern (or rather, postmodern) poetry?
Anyway, I like abstract visual art, poetry, and modern prose literature, but I’m fairly unsophisticated musically despite my professional interest in it. From a neuropsychological perspective all arts are very interesting but abstract visual art seems to have made the most progress.
This is an all too common pattern. Music appears to be the most difficult, most abstract art form (evidently that is part of its attraction for me). This is evidenced not only by the numerous cases I have encountered of otherwise intellectually sophisticated people being musically unsophisticated, but also by the historical development of music, which has tended to lag behind the other arts. (For example, for musicians the “Romantic period” refers to the period from about 1820 to 1910; I remember being shocked to learn that the early 19th century was the tail end of romanticism in other arts, such as literature.)