This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
In this article, there is nothing under the section the Spiritualist debate? Either this should be deleted or revised. --Anonymous 20:52, 09 May 2010 (PST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.119.249.138 ( talk)
This entire article is pretty confusing, but the sections "The Formalist debate" and "Opposition to instrumental music" are--what the hell? I am by no means a Nietzsche scholar, but the Nietzsche quote in the section on instrumental music is utterly misleading. Nietzsche himself wrote instrumental music, and he speaks in The Birth of Tragedy of how music cannot be made to follow the meaning of ideas; music qua music is instrumental, even if it happens to include sung words. I'm removing the Nietzsche quote. Ratiuglink ( talk) 21:45, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I hope everyone is happy with this, more classical pages were linking to absolute music anyway. -- Chinasaur 08:33, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
There's good empirical evidence that "absolute" is preferable: the majority of music articles were linking to "absolute music" rather than "abstract music" even though "absolute" used to be the redirect.
To my mind, however, the main difference between the words is that "absolute music" is a definite, well-understood term in classical music, whereas "abstract music" could really have many other connotations outside of any established terminology. You could imagine saying "that music is really abstract" about a lot of different genres of music, whereas "that is a piece of absolute music" has a more specific meaning. An analogy would be calling free verse "unstructured verse" or the like; it technically describes the form well, but it allows other unintended meanings and there happens to be a more specific and recognizable term available.
In the context of new musicology and those sorts of PoMo arguments, "abstract music" seems to be used more, perhaps even to mean something slightly different. If that's the case, maybe that stuff could be moved to abstract music, but most of this article is focusing on the different between absolute and program music, for which "absolute" is surely more appropriate.
Not sure what you mean with the pregnancy thing. -- Chinasaur 07:31, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
From Cleanup: Abstract music - gobbledygook
what is some historical/cultural characteristics of absolute music?
I removed the following sentence:
As, though I'm not sure what "purely as music" means, it appears that any other form of enjoyment or consideration is unacceptable. Hyacinth 05:00, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
aha i caught you! hi! im laurence adriel from pauline vanier —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.254.98.24 ( talk) 00:51, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Could someone explain in plain English what this means, please:
I'm a music graduate, and so far as I can understand this, it appears to be nonsense: surely formalism is quite often a characteristic of "absolute music". In any case, if that sentence is tripping me up, I don't think it's a very good opening to a lede which should be a straight-forward introduction to someone looking for explanation/definition. Unless someone can make sense of this, I may come back and try to clarify it myself. Alfietucker ( talk) 04:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
"Formalisms" could be better read as "formalities". Either way it's misleading, as the point is absolute music about about the form and nothing else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.208.126.237 ( talk) 01:06, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Why and where does this article need additional citations for verification? What references does it need and how should they be added? Hyacinth ( talk) 00:39, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
The decision to ignore Mark Evan Bonds's book _Absolute Music: The History of an Idea_ is a major deficiency. This is by common consensus the most important contribution to the topic since Dahlhaus--and far more lucid than the scattershot work of Chua. A minor quibble: Wittgenstein's _Culture and Value_ is in _no_ sense a "diary," however much it might so seem to a naive reader. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.95.54.104 ( talk) 17:55, 1 April 2022 (UTC)