Always Room for Improvement?

[quiescen]

I was recently browsing the ‘Composer’s Corner’ forum over at Pianoworld. It’s a place where pianist/composers can ‘lay bare’ their work for the scrutiny of others.
 
This is done a lot in the classical music world. And it can be very useful for feedback. The budding composer is told that this or that about the harmony. Melody may be picked apart as well as the entire composition itself.
 
The purpose of the scrutiny is for the budding composer to grow. But I have a problem with this and it has to do with the word ’art.’
 
You see, you really can’t improve on art and here’s why -- it’s unique and original in the moment it was created. No two pieces will be the same. Each one a perfect representation of the artist’s inspiration. Each one a stepping stone to the next and so on.
 
If the purpose of critique is improvement, I have to ask “what is being improved?” The answer, of course, is technique. And technique, while important, shadows in importance when compared with the artist’s capacity to trust themselves and what comes out of them.
 
By asking others if this or that can be improved, what you’re really doing is giving others permission to tell you what they think is good, bad, etc. And this usually is not very useful.
 
For example, how helpful would it be if I told you I didn’t like a certain harmony you used and suggested something different. Or, suppose I took a listen to your music and said “the melody doesn’t do it for me” or anyone of a thousand suggestions I could possibly give.

By trusting yourself … by giving yourself permission to create without judgment, you won’t need others opinions on whether something can be improved or not. You will bypass the need to garner approval and reap the rewards of this - the ability to create unfettered.

[ted]

I stay away from places like that board for composers Edward, for a several reasons; this despite my having contributed a number of my pieces to their CD. I have never been able to see any sense at all in theories, and all that constant argument about chords, harmony and structure go in one ear and out the other. At one stage I took lessons from a very prominent local composer. He had this obsession with harmony too, and told me certain chords I used were "wrong". I tried hard but the trouble was, I still liked my "wrong" chords more than his "right" ones, and after a couple of months I couldn't see any point in continuing. Rules are for fools.

All right, the "fault", if any exists, might be mine. Perhaps my musical response is hardwired differently. Either way I can't do much about it. It is true that development of one's personal art, in my case mostly improvisation, continues for a lifetime, and I continue to learn every day. I like to think I am improving but it could be an illusion ! However, this learning, at least with me, mostly comes from direct exposure to music of a very eclectic type, not from structured education.

I conjecture that most people post in such places because they want praise and approval, or just enjoy arguing. Speaking for myself, I do not need either praise or criticism and certainly not argument. Perhaps there exists a duty to share, but only if listeners enjoy it. Pianostreet is actually pretty good in that way. Musical diversity is tolerated and encouraged and we have a group of very interesting improvisers here.

[j_menz]

Art is one thing, but there is also a craft involved, and craft can be learned and improved.

[ajspiano]

You see, you really can’t improve on art and here’s why -- it’s unique and original in the moment it was created. No two pieces will be the same.

Yes - except that composition, unlike photography for example, doesn't capture 1 moment in time. It is capable of forever changing elements whether they be more substantial such as rhythm/melody/harmony or less substantial such as interpretation of the work. Any individual work changes with each rendition, and knowledge gained from analysis of any one idea has a positive effect on subsequent ideas.

Rules and stringent advice regarding composition are daft as far as I'm concerned. But for the developing composer, advice regarding harmony or otherwise can increase their exposure to what is possible from a compositional perspective. Such advice should be considered as an equally viable compositional option and the artist should then be strongly encouraged to make a personal decision on the matter.

This is exactly the same as listening to vast arrays of music and taking ideas from there, its just presented in a different way. Which seems to (unfortunately) lead to some 'teachers' branding such advice as the be all and end all of the art form, which is totally ludicrous.

Personally I think these 'teachers' are not teaching much at all, so much as acting like army drill sergeants and are likely less capable themselves of just listening. Art requires free thought, stringent rules are not an option for truly creative work.

[ignaceii]

I did some thinking also last couple of hours, regarding a topic considered "learned" in the students corner.
At 51, playing the piano my own way, do I still need to learn all the harmony and stuff like that, being a largely autodidact amateur. I keep wandering. Is it worth.

My playing goes with the moods of the day. But I enjoy every note played.

And my message: 
Even painting can be regarded as art in movement. Because, as everyone who looks and the painting recreates it in his mind.
Looking supericially, as you can play superficially.
Looking by brekaing the painting up, as we pianists can also do.
Looking with depth, playing deep.

The painting is the Plato-form, as the composition on paper is similar.
Once we touch it with our fingers, or look at it, that is, going over with our senses, we create one picture, or shadow in Plato's cave.

To end:
Still, one piece played, how bad it may sound for others, it's still million times better than listening to a recording. We grow while we recreate, not so much while just listening.

I'm not a fan of forums, because words are so limited to express once mind, and the communication is not instantaneous, but broken up in time.
See how much new entries a day reach the fora, while there are rarely few occasions where a topic is discussed in depth.
We create information stress that hurts rather than heels the pains we feel in our art.

There is always room for improvement. Break up forum categories into subcategories, so that each topic ends in the right drawer.

Bye for now.

From Belgium, I great you.

 

[asuhayda]

I feel that people on the boards are overly critical of other peoples' playing.  I think it's best to leave it to your teacher/coach/peers to give you critique.. unless of course you're a professional recording artist or something.

At face value, the idea of posting your music for the world to hear is very good.. but there's a lot of "hecklers" out there that are extremely nitpicky and many times are just downright mean.  So, it's kind of difficult to pick through the sea of criticism (and praise) that you receive and formulate anything constructive.  I think it's too easy for people to hide behind the internet and blast someone's performance to pieces without having to look them in the eyes..  like I said, you'd think that this may actually be a good thing because it takes it to a more objective place.  But, I find that is often not the case.. many people are critical simply for its own sake.  Which, of course is not helpful to your morale or your playing..

I find that recording something and playing it back to myself is a very good way to improve on mistakes.. trust your own judgement and who cares what the internet thinks!

IMHO

Adam

[m1469]

I understand that personal expression is fairly philosophical, and that the context to whatever is accepted as "good art" seems quite subjective, and that these things make a subject like this a bit difficult to fully handle.  Our definitions regarding these are hopefully changing and growing, and it's likely that the type of people we associate these definitions with and/or the level of work that is done together, will also change as we grow.

I do think that the process of clarifying one's artistic aims is useful, and even though handling the idea of art is philosophical and subjective in the broad sense, there are ways for critical thinking to be useful on a personal level.  To me, the largest benefit of engaging somebody else's critical thinking is to help an artist better understand oneself, to have a view of oneself from an angle that s/he can't necessarily achieve by always looking through only his/her own eyes and ears (even through recording).

It can be easy to confuse a physical sensation or an emotion with actually expressing an intention outwardly in action, and/or to just fall in love with sound in the air even if it doesn't necessarily lead the listener anywhere in particular.  I don't believe that an artist's expression is necessarily perfect just as they create it.  Perhaps the intention is not necessarily to communicate at all, or perhaps it is to communicate, and either case is fine.  The right critical thinking, though, can help one assess whether or not what they intend is actually being achieved, and I think one's ability to trust oneself as an artist is very related to knowing whether one is actually accomplishing their goals as intended.