from Kristian Kristiansen

Maybe we should have a debate about the "classical" in relationship to jazz and performance?

Music, dance and architecture - the nature of the relationships ...The house of music and the house of architecture - a Louis Armstrong solo is for me like a classical temple - an artistic structure of univeral joy ...

Posted at Apr 04/2004 12:47 AM:
Alessandra Lopez y Royo (SOAS) The concept of the "classical" is screaming to be revisited. What is classical khmer art or classical Indian dance or classical Noh? Why classical?

Posted at Apr 24/2004 06:30 PM:
Jack: Well, semantically it's a bit loose -- "classicus" just means "first-rate," so it seems to me that finding out what's "classical" would involve, first, determining what our ancestors thought was first-rate art, and then (second) deciding if they were right. Since they didn't have any jazz per se, you'd have to see if the principles which make, say, Sophocles "classical" also apply to, say, Louis Armstrong.

I wonder if "universal joy" isn't a bit specific, however; one of many moods that can be evoked through classical art. "Universal thrill of horror" is another specific mood within the repetoire of classical expression.

But I feel strongly that "first-rate" is a flexible concept, insofar as judgment must be rooted in an understanding of a specific art-form's internal organisation. Does this bode ill for universal comparisons?