[Dixielandjazz] Music is ?

[Charles Suhor]

> Paul.  Is beauty inherent in an artifact? I see art as an enduring 
> means
>     of engaging the consciousness of another individual.  One's
>     reaction to a particular piece probably depends more on yourself
>     than on the artwork itself -- or even the artist.


I’ll run with Paul’s  entry, though in a direction he might disagree 
with! One can greatly enrich one’s reactions by opening to all 
sounds—the birds, the wind, a car screeching, conversation, a child 
laughing or crying, the students tugging at piano strings, yes, even 
rap, and even the silence between sounds—with the same attentive and 
receptive ears that you use when opening to music that you're well 
disposed to.

As Paul points out, you might not end up liking it, but letting 
perceptions of all kinds engage your consciousness without immediate 
categorization, negativity, or endorsement makes for an experience 
that’s joyful (I won’t say Divine, but I’m okay with those who do), 
simply because this state of mind is attentive and has a readiness for 
attunement. Isn’t this how we came to enjoy things in many arts and 
non-arts that we didn’t like at first? In my case, modern jazz, Pee Wee 
Russell, Philip Glass, T.S. Eliot, Harold Pinter, beets, wine, Picasso, 
cats, and lots of other stuff.

I realize that this can come off as a hipper-than-thou stance, but 
trying to witness with equanimity, then hold conclusions lightly, has 
been useful to me as a way of digging the universe less judgmentally 
and with less stress.