Was he right about aesthetics?

Is music the highest form of art?

Attached: arthur.jpg (220x281, 17K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=-ZYG7xGf-ag
youtube.com/watch?v=NMvJhw60ROk
youtube.com/watch?v=hf-B3Y3B0TQ
youtube.com/watch?v=k2HRzIyyXvU
youtube.com/watch?v=fylC38zQg8M
jdarriulat.net/Introductionphiloesth/index.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Cinema hadn't been invented yet. I think cinema is like music, but goes beyond.

Definitely.
I don't think so.

I owe so much to Schopenhauer. I started appreciating art and beauty way more and in a whole different way after reading his main book.

It is certainly the most effective at imposing mood according to the artist's will, and as such also most telling about the artist's temperament. It even has synergy with intellectual development, regardless of whether the emphasis is literary or scientific.

He values music for the same reason all philosophy valued the phonic substance: because it's an illusion of self-presence and consciousness

what would he say about how formulated modern music is?

Ive never understood the appeal of music, it just sounds like noise to me. Sucks

Cinema -> Video Games -> Virtual Reality

>it just sounds like noise to me
I don't believe you. How can you listen to a Mozart piano concerto and think it's just blind noise? Are you tone deaf?

Video Games are the future of art, though

What do you mean by "formulated"?

I guess I should say, it's not like random noise, i can tell it's music, I can hear rythmn or whatever. There's just never been anything aesthetic about it, I've never cared or known what I'm suppose to care about in it. Not that I haven't wanted to, the way people talk about music it sounds like I'm missing out

Not him, but dependent on rhythm versus arrangement.

Where do I start with aesthetics lads?

Attached: 1552538270070.png (660x500, 462K)

>Not that I haven't wanted to, the way people talk about music it sounds like I'm missing out
Listen to a shit ton of music everyday. Not the same stuff over and over, but do that too if you stumble upon something that you genuinely like.
It is the most refined form of expression a single human or a tiny group being can produce, imo. Kino and vidya are good too but they're not the same. Here's what I like

youtube.com/watch?v=-ZYG7xGf-ag
youtube.com/watch?v=NMvJhw60ROk
youtube.com/watch?v=hf-B3Y3B0TQ

There must be something that you like, stay off the pop charts if that's all you come across.

No, visual arts are superior. You have higher bandwidth for artistic information through your eyes than the ear.

>jazz
tell me why you hate freedom

Attached: 0895-theodor-adorno.jpg (1515x1119, 786K)

I don't hate freedom, I just love ginger boys more ;)
youtube.com/watch?v=k2HRzIyyXvU
youtube.com/watch?v=fylC38zQg8M

And these tunes are actually jazzier, his early work isn't as much.

It is the most exalted in Spirit, but not necessarily the highest in spiritual order. The fruit of the literary type is faster in growth than it is in ripening; the fruit of the musical type is faster in ripening than it is in growth.

yes

jdarriulat.net/Introductionphiloesth/index.html
here
if you don't read french then too bad for you

Hello Darkseid, hope you are doing fine senpai.

I think I've heard all types, I don't think there's any I'm unaware of

for

Name 1 film that can compete with 1 composition of Beethoven.

There is an argument to be made that cinema has greater potential but it has not even come close to the heights of music yet.

why the fuck do you even believe in a highest form of art

It’s funny that he thought that but hated mathematics because he couldn’t do it. Shows you what a brainlet he was.

Schopie made me like still lifes. I used to think they were dumb af but I was converted

where does he talk about them?

What are you talking about? He deeply respects math. He doesn't like the way geometry was taught in Germany (because it was a shit method) but he has good things to say about math

In the section about painting

of what book

The World as Will and Idea, Volume 1, Part 3

Visual art requires more mediation (not to be confused with capability) for its expression than that which is required for the expression of music, therefore, it requires more overall work to attain to the level of exaltation of music, and has yet to reach it within this spatiotemporally limited world. Visual art receives its primal form from immediacy/immediate Image, and becomes sublime through mediated expression; music receives its primal form via mediacy/mediated Sound, and becomes sublime through immediate expression.

This. Visual art is still the facsimile of the idea, but music is the facsimile of the thing in itself

I.e. Image/visual art is cruder/less subtle than Sound/music, and is therefore less conducive to sublime expression compared to the latter.

2001 A Space Odyssey

No vidya is

Oh I was thinking of Goethe.

After pondering for a bit, it occurs to me that both music and cinema are inherently linked to the human perception of time. Visual art is an instantaneous snapshot of an artistic impression.

The human perception of time is all tied up in our psychology and consciousness. An event can only be percieved as an effect preceded by a cause.

There are expectations built up in the listeners mind as a melody is developed and when it is resolved, there is a tangible release of tension. Its certainly enjoyable. But is it beautiful?

Can a narrative or a plot line or a story arc be beautiful? It can be entertaining, informative, inspirational....but does it point to an essential truth?

It seems like beauty lies somewhere in the resolution of expectation with reality.

So perhaps the highest artform is the one that can develop and resolve the most expectations.