Music is my heart!

[pathetiquegirl]

Have ever thought that music shows you the heart and soul of a person? 

[henrah]

If they express their heart and soul in the piece they are playing, then yes.

[pathetiquegirl]

no i don't agree with that

[henrah]

Surely if they aren't expressing their heart and soul, then there isn't any heart and soul going into the piece, thus you can see/hear nothing about their heart and soul by watching/listening to that piece.

If someone puts there heart and soul into a piece, then yes, they are definately showing you their heart and soul.

[pathetiquegirl]

when a person plays they *always* put some feeling into there music.  it might not be expressed in their playing though.

[ilikepie]

Surely if they aren't expressing their heart and soul, then there isn't any heart and soul going into the piece, thus you can see/hear nothing about their heart and soul by watching/listening to that piece.

If someone puts there heart and soul into a piece, then yes, they are definately showing you their heart and soul.

Can't they fake it?

[henrah]

Yes, but you are still not being shown their heart and soul. You are being shown a false representation of their heart and soul, if anything.

[pathetiquegirl]

people always express.  and they can fake it, you just have to learn when they are.

[jas]

when a person plays they *always* put some feeling into there music.

How do you know? I don't believe that at all. It's completely possible to move your fingers and get a piece note-perfect with your mind elsewhere. That's not expression, that's playing on autopilot. I also believe that it's possible to play a piece of music, concentrating on the music, but not be expressing anything other than what's written on the page in front of you, especially if it's a composer or piece you don't really care for.

I have never once come away from a performance feeling as though a musician has bared his/her "soul" to me, or that I know any more about them than I did before I heard them play. I have come out of performance where the performer has been visibly moved by the music -- and he may have thought he was baring his soul, or intended for that to be the case -- but that didn't affect my own perception of it. If it's a moving piece, then if it's played well I might be moved by it -- the performer is just a means to an end, a communicator between the composer's intentions and an audience. Some do it better than others, some have a particular affinity for specific composers etc., but how often do you read a review of a performance where the critic waxes lyrical about how wonderfully you can feel the performer's anguish, or happiness, or misery?

it might not be expressed in their playing though.

If it's not expressed in their playing then presumably you mean their face and movements? That can easily be nothing more than theatrics. (I'm not saying that's always the case, just that it's easily done. Actors do it for a living.) Some instrumentalists barely move when they play. Some play instruments where facial expressions aren't very practicable. Is, say, a pianist who weaves around at the piano, rolling his/her eyes around and making weird faces "expressing his heart and soul" more than someone who's fairly still when they play? I find it a bit distracting when the performer "gets in the way" of the music like that.

This may be a very cynical thing to say, but I think that "showing your heart and soul" is nothing more than a quixotic figure of speech people use to gush over an excellent performance (whether it's a visible performance or just a recorded one). It has no real meaning. A musician can be moved by what they are playing, and this may or may not have an effect on the listener. But I think that, for example, when Gould called Richter "the most powerful musical communicator of our time," he didn't mean that it was Richter's own heart and soul he was communicating.

I'm sure others will disagree, which is fair enough. I rambled a bit there.

Jas

[m1469]

Well, as I see it, our heart and soul and mind (which are quite interchangeable and mean very similar things) are the filter through which we view the world.  Yes, we have our senses, but nothing means anything useful to us without it filtering through some form of those other aspects of who we are (however advanced or unadvanced that process is).  Depending on how a person processes almost anything, the same type of process will be applied to music. 

If a person experiences life very much emotionally, this will be reflected in some way through almost everything s/he does, including piano performance.  If a person is regularly detached from emotion, and this is his/her state-of-being, so to speak, this also will be reflected in almost everything s/he does; including piano performance. 

Perhaps non-emotion is exactly what lay in somebody's heart, and therefore evidence of that through music, allows another to view the content of the individual's heart.  Emotion is not the only expression, nor the only content within the heart.  Or perhaps non-emotion is an emotion in itself.  The same could be said about somebody who fakes emotion... doesn't that say something about the individual and the content of his/her heart in general ? 

Anyway, what actually qualifies as reliable evidence, toward the presence of one or the other ?

Also, it may be our own perception that pegs a performance as a certain way, and not really the performer at all.

I think a person can actually tell a lot about another from the music (and many other things, for that matter) that a person expresses or does not express.  And actually I think it's probably quite difficult to hide, or maybe even impossible, when one knows what to look for.


m1469

[ted]

I think that meaning is imposed by my brain on the sounds I hear, not the other way around. I am at liberty to decide which thoughts and emotions I shall experience on hearing sound. Music itself is completely abstract and contains no embodied, transmitted meaning at all. What a player or composer feels or thinks is completely irrelevant to me. Indeed, a computer might produce music which excites me more than the playing of a pianist or the works of a great composer. 

[g_s_223]

Whether you can see them playing or not affects your impression. L-L is one extreme of "visuals", Richter was a poker-face.

And on CD, you can't see them of course, but you do get the occasional sniff or humming or groan.

[20258]

Well, as I see it, our heart and soul and mind (which are quite interchangeable and mean very similar things) are the filter through which we view the world.  Yes, we have our senses, but nothing means anything useful to us without it filtering through some form of those other aspects of who we are (however advanced or unadvanced that process is).  Depending on how a person processes almost anything, the same type of process will be applied to music. 

If a person experiences life very much emotionally, this will be reflected in some way through almost everything s/he does, including piano performance.  If a person is regularly detached from emotion, and this is his/her state-of-being, so to speak, this also will be reflected in almost everything s/he does; including piano performance. 

Perhaps non-emotion is exactly what lay in somebody's heart, and therefore evidence of that through music, allows another to view the content of the individual's heart.  Emotion is not the only expression, nor the only content within the heart.  Or perhaps non-emotion is an emotion in itself.  The same could be said about somebody who fakes emotion... doesn't that say something about the individual and the content of his/her heart in general ? 

Anyway, what actually qualifies as reliable evidence, toward the presence of one or the other ?

Also, it may be our own perception that pegs a performance as a certain way, and not really the performer at all.

I think a person can actually tell a lot about another from the music (and many other things, for that matter) that a person expresses or does not express.  And actually I think it's probably quite difficult to hide, or maybe even impossible, when one knows what to look for.


m1469

I agree with m1469
I think we can feel from what they express in piano performance, and I think don't need to look for what their face or action are doing or acting, as music can express what a person feeling now. Last time I saw a girl playing a chinese instrument in a composition,that time she was playing a sadness part. I didn't see her face as my seat was too far from the stage,but when I heard what she was playing,I suddenly felt sadly in my heart....At last the girl won second or third prize..
So what I want to say is to hear the music in order to know what they want to express and can feel do they really  means for it.

[quantum]

I feel that music is an abstract means of communication that needs to be interpreted in order to fully benefit from it.  A performer may be pouring his/her heart and soul - but particular experience is only relevant to that person.  Others listening need to interpret those sounds and make a relevent connection to their own lives: it may be similar in idea or totally different.  Muisc does not transmit exact emotion, but rather evokes emotion from it's listeners.

I agree with Ted's points.

[henrah]

That's exactly right Quantum. It is our reactions to hearing the music, and what it evokes in ourselves that the true emotion comes from. The player can be, as you said 'pouring his/her heart and soul' into the piece, yet not everyone will feel exactly the same way. Playing something - say Chopin - to a very lower-class person versus a very upper-class person will yield extremely different emotions and effects on those two listeners, as they have had entirely different lives and experiences to relate the music to. One of them might not even be able to relate to the music at all, and therefore to them the music has no meaning.
Henrah

[gruffalo]

on the subject of showing your emotions. you shouldnt try to show your emotions. i didnt notice that i sway from time to time until i saw a small video of myself. some people contain their emotions, some people can't. it doesnt mean one or the other are less musical. its just a shame that people use this to put on a show, or think that they are doing that. i can generally tell when visual emotions are fake. some are just absurd.

[johnny-boy]

I always compose from the "heart". Too many composers analyze music to death. Music is pure emotion at its best. 

Here’s my message to young composers; stop analyzing and write the damn thing – from the “heart”.

Best, John

[gorbee natcase]

Your choice of repertoire may indicate what type of person you are. A true Mozartian may be totaly different to a Bach enthusiast

[m1469]

on the subject of showing your emotions. you shouldnt try to show your emotions. i didnt notice that i sway from time to time until i saw a small video of myself. some people contain their emotions, some people can't. it doesnt mean one or the other are less musical. its just a shame that people use this to put on a show, or think that they are doing that. i can generally tell when visual emotions are fake. some are just absurd.

Well, since when is somebody required to sway in order to show emotion ?  Is that what we are discussing ?  Whether or not to sway ?

I thought this was something different.

[pathetiquegirl]

you can show your heart by the type of music you like and play. 

who's your favorite composer? 

[jas]

no i don't agree with that

when a person plays they *always* put some feeling into there music.  it might not be expressed in their playing though.

people always express.  and they can fake it, you just have to learn when they are.

you can show your heart by the type of music you like and play.

You're making these assertions very definitively for someone who hasn't backed up or elaborated upon a single thing you've said.

[pathetiquegirl]

i am talking from personal observation.  sorry if you don't agree.  if the whole world said i was wrong wounldn't make a difference.  majority rule isn't always right.  i am allowed to have my own personal oppinion.

[jas]

i am talking from personal observation.  sorry if you don't agree.  if the whole world said i was wrong wounldn't make a difference.  majority rule isn't always right.  i am allowed to have my own personal oppinion.

That's not what I said. Whether I agree with you or not isn't the point.

What I meant was that you're making these statements as though they're fact, not opinion, because you're offering no explanation for what you're saying.