Sports simulate war. In the original context, this is relevant, because video games don't bring much new.
I'll get back to you on this in a bit, I'll have to think about that some more. Right now I want to say that sports are simply a transmuted and sublimated form
of war, not a simulation of it, but don't quote me on that just yet (or, well, do if you want to.)
They are not "real" activities (ffs, I already gave you examples of real acitivities), they are GAMES, games that are not computerized.
Games are a subset of activities. You probably get what I meant, anyway.
You're misunderstanding me by huge margin. First, music is objective, and second, you're misinterpreting me regarding dancing and I'm too tired to bother explaining why. You should be able to read between lines sometimes. Regarding your take on Charlie Parker - the point was that Charlie Parker is selfish dude. Further, jazz music wouldn't be jazz music if there were no selfish/self-expression motives.
We were discussing whether engagement and enjoyment are good criteria for art or not and I was saying how the best jazz I've listened to (mostly fusion tbh) was more engaging than trance, so if anything this
is a tangent. But if this is in response to what I was saying earlier about how "self-expression" isn't an explicit goal great artists set for themselves, I'll modify that a bit to clarify; it isn't a specific distinguishing quality of great art, and it isn't a necessary
goal either. Every action a person does is an expression of himself, even if it's an expression of their flaws; great art is created with an artist's genuine talent, discipline, effort, and intelligence, not by purely aiming for self-expression or trying to express something. Some of the greatest art seen in human history was created without any explicit intent for self-expression or any specific aim to create "art," just by a talented artist working at his craft and doing what he did best (many times creating great works just for money, or to entertain important people with high tastes, etc.) Given these things, I can't really endorse the whole "self-expression is what art is about" undercurrent which many people have pushed in all the artgame threads I've read here.
And music isn't "objective" by any stretch of the imagination. There's nothing "objective" about judging music either, just like there isn't anything "objective" about judging any other art (the entire concept of "objectivity" inherently precludes judgements.) You can already see this here just by how you've been trying to tell me that the trance song you posted is more engaging (interesting, immersive, absorbing, etc.; substitute any synonym you want if it makes my position make more sense to you) than the jazz one, and I thought the exact opposite. It's just that music requires more specialized terminology, and it's a bit harder to "pin down" in language what you specifically liked or disliked about it than stuff like movies, novels, paintings, games, etc. I remember C.A. Sinclair saying something in the past about how a lot of music critics feel this way too, and as a result just end up talking vaguely about lyrics and imagery instead of, well, the actual music.
The fact that you went on to decide that you prefer Charlie Parker even though you don't like him is a tangent, a hilarious one, one that simply shows that you judge things like a robot.
Uh, I said I preferred him in comparison to
the trance song you linked, and gave basic reasons why. Every single judgement I have made about his song was in comparison to the other trance song, usually using words like "more" or "longer" (relative comparisons.) Preference is obviously relative; you can prefer something you're ambivalent towards in comparison to something you dislike, if you have to choose between the two things, and you can still say why you like this thing more than that thing ("dislike less" if you want, it's the same thing anyway.) "Robot" comparison is still as funny as ever, though!
european free jazz
(aka "free improvisation") tries to be literally formless, i.e. consciously avoid conventional musical forms and structures. the problem is that avoiding form sort of becomes its own form. also the music sounds really dry and boring 99% of the time.
So I guess this would be the corresponding "artgame movement" in jazz, then? =P
lol i just realized that all of this is only tangentially related to the topic. i just love rambling about music, sorry.
Don't worry about it, the main topic here keeps changing every page anyway.