Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • Real Name
    Timothy Lutte
  • Copyright

Trlgomez's Achievements


Newbie (1/7)



  1. I don't think one should consider any audience when writing or performing music. Quite the opposite. If they would, there would never be any new direction in music or art for that matter, because the artists are the torchbearers and innovators. They should be concerned completely with the most important conversation and that is the internal conversation. That is also the purest of statements, and coincidentally tends to affect listeners and other performers in the deepest, most profound way. Do you think Picasso painted with the thought of appealing to a generic public? Even the romantic masters like Beethoven were creating this way. Stravinsky was assaulted after the premier of "The Rite of Spring", and in the words of Miles Davis (who created three separate paths and styles in music) after being booed by an audience: "It took me a lifetime to understand what I am playing, can I really expect you to understand it after an hour?" By the way, his music is now standard repertoire over the world, and "Kind of Blue" is the best selling jazz album in history.
  2. If you look at an artist like John Coltrane, for example, he purposely detached himself from society at the height of his musical popularity to practice 12 hours a day, until he felt he had a uninhibited connection between himself and his instrument. Therefore any idea, thought, sound he heard he would be able to effectively transfer through his instrument and ultimately into the music. Then, you add his interaction with the other members of his trio at that time, which was legendary. It was a completely "free" (as in uncensored and virtuous - stemming from virtue) exchange of ideas from the very essence of one's being. To me that resonates as the perfect Randian Ideal, but I am not certain others would agree?
  3. As far as spontaneous improvisation contradicting the notion of practice makes perfect?? I couldn't be more in disagreement. In fact, spontaneous improvisation is the result of a total, complete mastery of all technical and aesthetic elements of one's instrument. Only when one has achieved this level of competence is he/she able to effectively perform the flow of consciousness necessary to be an effective soloist. Again, the point of art and culture in general should rather be from the performer's perspective, than concern over the acceptance and/or understanding of an audience. That is the only acceptable rational or objective ideal. Therefore, wether you "get it" or not should be of absolutely no concern to a jazz musician or any artist as they are engaged in the most personal pursuit of artistic expression, even when taken within a group context where (in jazz specifically) everyone is allowed to contribute as much of their own voice as they feel is appropriate. A truly American invention, which can be connected philosophically with the principles and ideals of our founders.
  4. Jazz is more than just a form of music. From the perspective of the performer, it is a philosophical path and direct connection with the creative spark. As a musician, I have been grappling with this concept for many years now, but I believe I have come to the conclusion that jazz could be considered the ultimate form of SELF expression and therefore the prime musical example of pure objectivism.
  • Create New...