svd_solves_all

Interesting. This is a quote from that site, I assume quoting her: "Until a conceptual vocabulary is discovered and defined, no objectively valid criterion of esthetic judgment is possible in the field of music . . . No one, therefore, can claim the objective superiority of his choices over the choices of others. Where no objective proof is available, it’s every man for himself—and only for himself." It does leave me wondering what a conceptual vocabulary means...

There's a whole section of the forum devoted to Aesthetics. Music is of particular interest to me. I've heard that Ayn Rand had some ideas, something about "Romantic Realism" or something like that. If you read the PDF I linked to, I think you will find a rather odd attempt to "rationalize" the superiority of classical music, particularly the three "B" - Bach Beethoven and (B)Mozart, etc. The basic premise is that Jazz was played by blacks because they were not allowed to play in Symphony Orchestras, thus depriving them of the opportunity to play superior music. The writing is an attempt to make a "rational" argument about the alleged superiority of one type of music over another. So, since there is a section devoted to Aesthetics in Objectivism, it seems like it might have something to say about music. I'm just curious what precisely.

I'm just curious about what objectivism has to say about Jazz, if anything. I think it can be very odd to bring esthetics into some sort of rational discussion. I'm not an Objectivist, btw. These booklets, from a group by Lyndon Larouche, were dropped in large quantities on the steps of the New England Conservatory of Music, where I was a student at the time. I still have the paper copy. It's a rather strange attempt to somehow fit music into some sort of platonic idealism. http://wlym.com/PDF-77-85/CAM8009.pdf Food for thought. R