First off, of course gesture and theatrics are going to influence one's perception of music. Second off, if one is newly exposed to a subject (whether it be an artform or science or arithmetic being taught in elementary school, it doesn't matter), they are not going to necessarily understand or even focus upon what a seasoned practitioner, or admirer, would – which, frankly, is not a bad thing at all and is probably more refreshing than anything. To witness the response of someone unfamiliar often brings to surface the subtle and intricate beauties that lay atop the medium that one is so passionate about – those elements that the obsessed usually store away and forget to think about.
I hold both of these points to be true. Both of these points contradict exactly what I was saying in my previous post.
What I realized after a lot of contemplation is that I shouldn't have been frustrated that "people don't listen anymore". What I should have been frustrated with is that people only listen. I should have been frustrated that we have overly separated music and theatrics through our digestion of the recording.
(Now before I go too far on this, let me just say the following: the advancements within music in parallel with the existence of sound recording [and the proliferation of recordings] throughout society have been monumental. This is a technology that has allowed for endless study of performances and dissections of idioms. Without sound recording, the last century of music would in no way have existed as it did. Though it has largely simplified listening habits of the public due to capitalist entities' marketing tactics, it has also allowed the connoisseur to expand their taste to the infinite degree. And lets be honest, if sound recording hadn't come about, the vast majority of people would still have simplified listening habits: their surroundings and their communal music making.)
My frustration was vented in the wrong direction. We should all have our immediate reactions to every part of the performance. What makes a performance great is the fact that its not just sound. Why even try to separate the sound and gesture!?
What I'm frustrated with is the fact that no one goes to performances anymore and is able to appreciate the gesture for what it once was. We all have our moldable aural landscape which has been present since the advent of the headphones. And with the advent of the MP3, this landscape has become even more customizable. What we've done is separate music from performance to such an end that in performances we expect songs to sound exactly as they do on the recording and to be accompanied by the best show on earth. We've lost our appreciation for the simple human movements that pull beauty out of objects before our eyes.
I'm ashamed to have even thought that "getting beyond" the theatrics allows for a deeper understanding. Before recordings of music, they were one in the same, there was no separation to be seen. To understand one, the other had to be understood. And frankly, having seen technically gifted academics give very boring performances, I would say that this still holds – only we often forget it during the toils of extended study.
To finish, the fact that, as music makers and as listeners, we've pulled apart and sewn back together the traditional notions of music is fascinating and very exciting. Most preexisting notions of music have been tested ad nauseum in the past century or so, and for good reason. I just hope that we're able to preserve the majesty of musicians gathering in a room and making the music that comes to them. In order to be able to do it all, we have to experience it all.
