>>>>> "dn" == darw_n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
dn> Anyways, there is a wrench in my gears in that ALOT of people
dn> like music for many different reasons, and they are often not
dn> truthful about it. One of my huge stumbling blocks in my
dn> research is this need to like something simply because its
dn> proper or because it was created by someone historical, or
dn> even worse, simply because it is cutting edge. This makes my
dn> work very difficult for it illiminates any possibilty of
dn> knowing what they _really_ like to hear...
Good luck separating music from its social context. Sometimes I will
be absolutely raving fanatical about a new record because it's by
someone whose previous records I've loved, only to realize a few
months later that what was happening was that I was happy to have a
new record by producer X more than actually liking that particular
record (most recent egregious example: last year's incredibly tedious
Underworld album). I think it is a very odd duck indeed who never does
this. By contrast, I'm guilty of ignoring an artist's work because I
haven't liked what they were making before and / or the scene of which
they're a part, only to realize later that I was being a close-minded
idiot. Again, I think most of us do this from time to time.
dn> The other thing is that I am not attempting to create a MMTI
dn> type test, in which you answer 25 vquestion, and wham, I can
dn> tell you if you'll like Paper Records or Code Red, no. I am
dn> simply trying to figure out a general pattern of typing, with
dn> room for all the "middle of the road" types.
dn> I hate to think that we like what we like "just because", I am
dn> after a clearer vision of "why"...
Creativity and our individual responses to it are probably the most
subjective things in life. I don't think we like things "just
because", but I do think that the "real" reasons why _Live at the
Liquid Room_ ripped my head off the first time I heard it, say, or why
I damn near started crying tears of joy the first time I heard Daft
Punk play live would be better explained within a therapeutic /
historical context than through any sort of reductive model or
theory. A useful example is those services on sites like amazon.com
that try to recommend music to you based on what you've already bought
or claimed to like. It's like shaking a Magic 8-Ball -- you never know
what's coming up next.
I'm at least as interested as anyone else in understanding what makes
good music good, if only because that would make it easier for me to
make good music myself. But figuring out psychological models that
predispose certain people to like certain sorts of art, well, that
doesn't seem so fertile a field for exploration. In any case, good
luck.
Forrest
. . . the self-reflecting image of a narcotized mind . . .
ozymandias G desiderata [EMAIL PROTECTED] desperate, deathless
(415)558-9064 http://www.aoaioxxysz.com/ ::AOAIOXXYSZ::
