9 Feb
2013
9 Feb
'13
6:22 a.m.
On 02/08/2013 04:57 AM, Len Ovens wrote:
On Fri, February 8, 2013 5:55 am, Stephen Stubbs wrote:
Science is in the technology the arts use. Even way back,
science/technology has had big impacts on art. For instance, painting
styles changed when strong, bright color pigments were developed.
Technology has had a big impact on music for thousands of years.
On 2/8/2013 1:43 AM, david wrote:
So now we have quantitative proof that the Ancient Greeks' views on
music were correct.
Music is not an art but a science, with well defined laws that enable
the musician to induce specific effects and emotions in the listener.
I don't know that "art" and "science" are mutually exclusive. The
art is
in the creation and the science in the analysis. Communication only works
where there is clearly defined meaning to things, often in a cultural
context. I have found it interesting to watch how a child reacts to some
kinds of music. It is obvious that they are getting a different meaning
from the same piece of music than I am. It is the same with writing a book
(I remember scientifically analyzing books in school) or painting a
picture. The tools used to communicate can be defined with science, but
art keeps creating new things to define.
And communicating new thoughts about existing things.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
http://clanjones.org/david/
http://dancing-treefrog.deviantart.com/