Doubt by numbers (from within) in your, in your analysis

Jay Smooth (of hiphopmusic.com) asks a question I've been meaning to blog about for some time:

Why Does the Existence of Musical Analysis Anger People?

I've been watching music discussions online for ten years now (word to rec.music.hip-hop), and every discussion board always a few of them: those people who are offended that serious music discussion even exists at all. Whenever a nice debate gets rolling, they will jump in and accuse all debaters of disrespecting the music by taking it so seriously. Here's an example from okayplayer's Lesson Board this weekend:

"Can anyone on the lesson just like an artist without having to analyze and critique until they suck the enjoyment out of music? Who cares if it doesn't fit your subjective standards about what real funk is? Do you like it or not?"

I'm leaving out the poster's name cuz it's not my intention to pick a fight, but I've never understood where this kinda thing is coming from. I can understand somewhat if you take personal offense to critiques of your favorite artist, but sometimes (as in the quote above) those who take offense don't even have a horse in the race. Which means, I have to assume, they are offended by the very existence of such musical analysis, just on general principle. But if that's the case, what do they imagine is the purpose of the discussion boards they're on? As another OKP countered, "what are people supposed to do? just name an artist, throw confetti and clap?"

Read the rest. Good discussion in comments, too.

Comments

[godoggo]

1.

I can't speak for the hip hop fans, but personally I find that explosive expressions of anger provide temporary relief for my physical pain. Since the top pain doc I saw on Tuesday assures me that at this point all I need is some good physical therapy, I expect to be exploding periodically for the next half year or so.

[godoggo]

2.

That said (and, also, I will try not to be jerky, but it is really a struggle for me), I think any analysis whose purpose is aesthetic (as opposed to technical analysis meant to help understand how an artist achieves his effects) will ultimately fail, because the essence of music, to me, is inspiration, which defies analysis by its nature. Presumably this has been pointed out by some famous philospher whom I've never read.

[godoggo]

3.

I think I meant intuition not inspiration.

[DJA]

4.

G.,

If that's the case, why do you read this blog?

Also, when you say that aesthetic analysis will ultimate fail, what do you mean, exactly? Obviously, (almost) nobody thinks there is One True Interpretation, but isn't the goal of aesthetic analysis to shed new light on a piece of music, to make you look at it from a perspective you've perhaps not previously considered? Have you really never read a piece of criticism that's succeeded in doing this for you?

[godoggo]

5.

Yes, I have read a piece of criticism that's succeeded in doing that for me.

I guess the key word is "ultimately." I mean you can analyze the machine but not the ghost in it. What makes music live is what the composer/performer himself doesn't understand.

I read blogs because they're interesting. Probabably not too healthy in excess though, like analyzing music. Swimming is apparently what I should be doing in my free time, and I believe they've got a pool down at 西來大學, where I'll be working this summer. Digressing, ain't I?