[LAU] re Subconscious Affecting Music

[david]

Hakan Koseoglu wrote:
> On 2 September 2010 08:01, david <gnome at hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>> But they weren't created for the masses. They commissioned and paid for by
>> the wealthy rulers, for themselves. They were done because someone paid the
>> artist to do them. Therefore, they are commercial art.
> Oh no, they were for the masses. Most of Bach's product is church
> music and those days you can't get more for masses than that.

Back then, the churches were big funders of composers and musicians. The 
city churches were also incredibly wealthy, even by today's standards.

And the "masses" didn't attend the big cathedral church in town. That 
was for the rulers, nobles and wealthy.

Bach didn't write free music for a church - he wrote it because they 
hired him to write it!

> Similarly there used to be plenty of concert halls where the musicians
> played fast and loud, mostly to the people leering and cheering. Most
> composers were not retainers by the nobility but would make money by
> selling the note sheets (and that's one of the many reason why
> Copyright came to be).

Which meant you had to have written music that people wanted to hear in 
the first place. You were writing popular music to make money. 
Commercial art again. The only difference is who's handing you the coin 
for your music.

-- 
David
gnome at hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community