|
i agree with you in general, gogogo: on trane in particular--i guess i should have pulled more of the argument i was making about visual art into the part on music, so that it was clearer. i listen alot, and i think it is important: what you can do is a function of what you can imagine, which is in part a function of what others have done.
because no-one is entirely without models. everyone reacts to someone else, to lots of other people. i could start a long long list of the people who influenced me up to this point, but it changes and will probably change again and again. here the point is that what you do, what i do, is not a sum of the people that we admire, that we listen to--we (i presume here in the pronoun) are engaged with a history that does not dominate us for being a history. and i think that relation--awareness of history that does not ential being dominated by it, copying it, is part of about the closest thing to being free available to us in this goofball world we live in.
on the other had, i know that there is something that happens when playing that clicks in a different way of thinking, and that way of thinking is much more open to what, for lack of a better word, i guess you'd call energy. the question of how from the everyday conscious viewpoint you think about that other mode of activity---is complicated--lots of people think of it in religious terms--i dont, but thats only because the terms dont operate well for me, but i suspect i know what you are talking about. the main point for me is that the space is tied to a mode of acitivity--you would not know about it if you were not engaged in it---and that this mode/awareness is available to many more people than the Great Genius tradition would lead you to think.
so sorry if my post was confusing at the end--if you combine it with elements of what you said, and you'd land pretty much where i am.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|