This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
I doubt there is anything out there that has actually achieved true universal appreciation but what would be the closest to this?
Film, Book, Album, Song, Painting, Photograph etc. it doesn't really matter but it should transcend all categories.
In reply to Removed User: Not quite sure how a photograph of a song trancends a poem.
In reply to stonemaster:
Did you mean "or a".
It can if the unit of measurement is the universal appreciation.
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux) Not quite sure how a photograph of a song trancends a poem.
Did you mean "or a".
It can if the unit of measurement is the universal appreciation.
In reply to Removed User: Nope, of. Just to add to the metaphysical side of things...
In reply to Removed User: One is stumped, for now.
In reply to Removed User: The Wire and the Skoda Octavia (Diesel Estate).
In reply to Removed User: Chips with good gravy, on the blackish side of brown and bursting with flavour.
The Mona Lisa's ok, but you know the chips are better.
T.
Other than that, you've got to move beyond art and maths or geometry was a good call earlier. The golden section, perhaps?
The Mona Lisa's ok, but you know the chips are better.
T.
Other than that, you've got to move beyond art and maths or geometry was a good call earlier. The golden section, perhaps?
In reply to Pursued by a bear:
The Fibonacci series and the Golden Section are closely related ...
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux) Chips with good gravy, on the blackish side of brown and bursting with flavour.
>
>
> Other than that, you've got to move beyond art and maths or geometry was a good call earlier. The golden section, perhaps?
The Fibonacci series and the Golden Section are closely related ...
In reply to Gordon Stainforth: I had a dim recall they were, as of a bell jangling in a distant room. I shall have to go and dig a bit more.
T.
T.
In reply to Pursued by a bear:
The Fibonacci Series, first 30 steps of:
0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55,
89, 144, 233, 377, 610, 987, 1597, 2584, 4181, 6765,
10946, 17711, 28657, 46368, 75025, 121393, 196418, 317811, 514229, 832040
The Golden Mean (incommensurate/goes to infinity, whatever the word is):
to 9 decimal places: 1.618033988
The ration between each of the Fibonacci numbers in sequence 'homes in' on the Golden Mean:
After 13 steps the ratio has become 233/144 = 1.618; and after 24 steps (46368/28657) it's correct to nine decimal places: 1.618033988
Etc. All very wonderful and mysterious
> (In reply to Gordon Stainforth) I had a dim recall they were, as of a bell jangling in a distant room. I shall have to go and dig a bit more.
The Fibonacci Series, first 30 steps of:
0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55,
89, 144, 233, 377, 610, 987, 1597, 2584, 4181, 6765,
10946, 17711, 28657, 46368, 75025, 121393, 196418, 317811, 514229, 832040
The Golden Mean (incommensurate/goes to infinity, whatever the word is):
to 9 decimal places: 1.618033988
The ration between each of the Fibonacci numbers in sequence 'homes in' on the Golden Mean:
After 13 steps the ratio has become 233/144 = 1.618; and after 24 steps (46368/28657) it's correct to nine decimal places: 1.618033988
Etc. All very wonderful and mysterious
In reply to Gordon Stainforth: Thanks Gordon, I hadn't started digging and now I'll put my shovel away. Excellently explained too.
And to return to the OP, the use of the golden mean thus provides a bridge between mathematics and visual art. Now does it link to music, I wonder...
T.
But my tea is calling, and more stridently than the distant bell I heard earlier.
And to return to the OP, the use of the golden mean thus provides a bridge between mathematics and visual art. Now does it link to music, I wonder...
T.
But my tea is calling, and more stridently than the distant bell I heard earlier.
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Doesn't meet the criteria.
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux)
>
> Yorkshire?
>
> Yorkshire?
Doesn't meet the criteria.
In reply to Pursued by a bear:
Well, the first ratios in the series relate directly to the most important ones in music:
1, 2, 3, 5, 8
The third, the fifth and the octave being perhaps the most important.
Well, the first ratios in the series relate directly to the most important ones in music:
1, 2, 3, 5, 8
The third, the fifth and the octave being perhaps the most important.
In reply to Pursued by a bear:
Mind you, I'm saying that totally off the top of my head, because the ratios as such will not related closely (a 'major third' is really 5 semitones, isn't it? etc), but there is a magic in those numbers being the same ...
(PS. I am NOT a musicologist, nor a mathematician, just fascinated by such things that lurk below the surface of art)
Mind you, I'm saying that totally off the top of my head, because the ratios as such will not related closely (a 'major third' is really 5 semitones, isn't it? etc), but there is a magic in those numbers being the same ...
(PS. I am NOT a musicologist, nor a mathematician, just fascinated by such things that lurk below the surface of art)
In reply to Pursued by a bear:
Yep, look up variations on the phrase "music of the spheres".
There's a book called "Measured Tones" by Ian Johnson which you might like to read
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Measured-Tones-Interplay-Physics-Music/dp/142009347...
It covers a lot of this stuff. It was way over my head as I am not musical enough to have kept up with it.
> (In reply to Gordon Stainforth) Thanks Gordon, I hadn't started digging and now I'll put my shovel away. Excellently explained too.
>
> And to return to the OP, the use of the golden mean thus provides a bridge between mathematics and visual art. Now does it link to music, I wonder...
>
>
> And to return to the OP, the use of the golden mean thus provides a bridge between mathematics and visual art. Now does it link to music, I wonder...
>
Yep, look up variations on the phrase "music of the spheres".
There's a book called "Measured Tones" by Ian Johnson which you might like to read
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Measured-Tones-Interplay-Physics-Music/dp/142009347...
It covers a lot of this stuff. It was way over my head as I am not musical enough to have kept up with it.
In reply to Removed User:
What're you on about, it's piece if land, isn't it? Read your title and question again, you didn't say a piece of what. If you meant piece of art then you should have said so, but even then many would still include Yorkshire, sculpted by that great artist in the sky.
(see the thread about Yorkshire churches).
> (In reply to Removed UserBruce Hooker)
> [...]
>
> Doesn't meet the criteria.
> [...]
>
> Doesn't meet the criteria.
What're you on about, it's piece if land, isn't it? Read your title and question again, you didn't say a piece of what. If you meant piece of art then you should have said so, but even then many would still include Yorkshire, sculpted by that great artist in the sky.
(see the thread about Yorkshire churches).
In reply to Blue Straggler:
Thanks, I might take a look at that, because the product description/review make it sound quite accessible to the layman.
Thanks, I might take a look at that, because the product description/review make it sound quite accessible to the layman.
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
No, it doesn't meet the criteria because it doesn't even come close to being universally acclaimed.
But you are right. To clarify the rules, this has to be art crafted by a human.
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux)
> [...]
>
> What're you on about, it's piece if land, isn't it? Read your title and question again, you didn't say a piece of what. If you meant piece of art then you should have said so, but even then many would still include Yorkshire, sculpted by that great artist in the sky.
>
> (see the thread about Yorkshire churches).
> [...]
>
> What're you on about, it's piece if land, isn't it? Read your title and question again, you didn't say a piece of what. If you meant piece of art then you should have said so, but even then many would still include Yorkshire, sculpted by that great artist in the sky.
>
> (see the thread about Yorkshire churches).
No, it doesn't meet the criteria because it doesn't even come close to being universally acclaimed.
But you are right. To clarify the rules, this has to be art crafted by a human.
In reply to bouldery bits:
Hard to believe but I know someone - of apparently sound mind - who doesn't like it!
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux)
>
> Father Ted?
>
> Father Ted?
Hard to believe but I know someone - of apparently sound mind - who doesn't like it!
In reply to Removed User:
The Taj Mahal (the real one, not the one that serves chicken korma) or the great wall of china or the golden gate bridge etc. might fit into a sub category but still might not win the acolade of "most universally acclaimed".
I prefer to restrict this to art for art's sake but others will disagree (no doubt).
The Taj Mahal (the real one, not the one that serves chicken korma) or the great wall of china or the golden gate bridge etc. might fit into a sub category but still might not win the acolade of "most universally acclaimed".
I prefer to restrict this to art for art's sake but others will disagree (no doubt).
In reply to Removed User:
Popular classical pieces like The Planet Suit or The Rite of Spring maybe, what's not to like?
Popular classical pieces like The Planet Suit or The Rite of Spring maybe, what's not to like?
In reply to Southern Man: dark side of the moon.
In reply to Southern Man:
What I actually meant was The Four Seasons.
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux)
>
The Rite of Spring>
What I actually meant was The Four Seasons.
In reply to Removed User: Carl Orff Carmina Burana maybe.
Caravaggio "The taking of Christ" is a stunning painting.
Caravaggio "The taking of Christ" is a stunning painting.
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
And here we get into Pythagorus' theory of music and modes.
Pythagorus said that if you take two strings of different length (but otherwise identical), then the simplicity of the ratio of the lengths determines how nice they sound plucked together.
So if they're the same length (ratio 1:1), they sound identical. If one is half the length of the other (ratio 1:2), they sound an octave apart, pretty nice. If one is a third the length of the other, you get a perfect 5th ... and so on. This is "natural tuning"
JS Bach popularised "Equal temperament tuning", where to move from one semitone to the next means you change the ratio by the twelfth root of two.
The thing is that a "natural tuning" perfect fifth is a bit different from an "equal temperament tuning" perfect fifth. Also, if you are tuned to "natural tuning" the note G played in the key of C is slightly different to the note G played in the key of D. So "equal temperament" allows interesting key changes and so on.
To answer the quesion, Bach's Cminor Fugue. They were going to put it on the voyager space ship, but decided that that would be showing off.
youtube.com/watch?v=JcFHuUJE0mU&
The fugue starts at about 1:20
Y.
> (In reply to Pursued by a bear)
>
> because the ratios as such will not related closely (a 'major third' is really 5 semitones, isn't it? etc)..
>
> because the ratios as such will not related closely (a 'major third' is really 5 semitones, isn't it? etc)..
And here we get into Pythagorus' theory of music and modes.
Pythagorus said that if you take two strings of different length (but otherwise identical), then the simplicity of the ratio of the lengths determines how nice they sound plucked together.
So if they're the same length (ratio 1:1), they sound identical. If one is half the length of the other (ratio 1:2), they sound an octave apart, pretty nice. If one is a third the length of the other, you get a perfect 5th ... and so on. This is "natural tuning"
JS Bach popularised "Equal temperament tuning", where to move from one semitone to the next means you change the ratio by the twelfth root of two.
The thing is that a "natural tuning" perfect fifth is a bit different from an "equal temperament tuning" perfect fifth. Also, if you are tuned to "natural tuning" the note G played in the key of C is slightly different to the note G played in the key of D. So "equal temperament" allows interesting key changes and so on.
To answer the quesion, Bach's Cminor Fugue. They were going to put it on the voyager space ship, but decided that that would be showing off.
youtube.com/watch?v=JcFHuUJE0mU&
The fugue starts at about 1:20
Y.
In reply to Removed User:
oh allright then, ill play along
don't think anyone anywhere has any complaint about half a tennis ball, their just so much fun, squish it down it juts pops back up, almost majic and so much more reliable than slinky s
oh allright then, ill play along
don't think anyone anywhere has any complaint about half a tennis ball, their just so much fun, squish it down it juts pops back up, almost majic and so much more reliable than slinky s
In reply to Yrmenlaf:
Thanks for that. Yes, I know quite a bit about Pythagorus and Bach on this (just haven't read anything about it for some years). I can play a few of the 24 preludes (especially the easy but wonderful first one in C) but NONE of the fugues!
> (In reply to Gordon Stainforth)
> [...]
>
> And here we get into Pythagorus' theory of music and modes.
>
> Pythagorus said that if you take two strings of different length (but otherwise identical), then the simplicity of the ratio of the lengths determines how nice they sound plucked together.
>
> So if they're the same length (ratio 1:1), they sound identical. If one is half the length of the other (ratio 1:2), they sound an octave apart, pretty nice. If one is a third the length of the other, you get a perfect 5th ... and so on. This is "natural tuning"
>
> JS Bach popularised "Equal temperament tuning", where to move from one semitone to the next means you change the ratio by the twelfth root of two.
>
> The thing is that a "natural tuning" perfect fifth is a bit different from an "equal temperament tuning" perfect fifth. Also, if you are tuned to "natural tuning" the note G played in the key of C is slightly different to the note G played in the key of D. So "equal temperament" allows interesting key changes and so on.
>
> To answer the quesion, Bach's Cminor Fugue. They were going to put it on the voyager space ship, but decided that that would be showing off.
>
> youtube.com/watch?v=JcFHuUJE0mU&
>
> The fugue starts at about 1:20
>
> Y.
> [...]
>
> And here we get into Pythagorus' theory of music and modes.
>
> Pythagorus said that if you take two strings of different length (but otherwise identical), then the simplicity of the ratio of the lengths determines how nice they sound plucked together.
>
> So if they're the same length (ratio 1:1), they sound identical. If one is half the length of the other (ratio 1:2), they sound an octave apart, pretty nice. If one is a third the length of the other, you get a perfect 5th ... and so on. This is "natural tuning"
>
> JS Bach popularised "Equal temperament tuning", where to move from one semitone to the next means you change the ratio by the twelfth root of two.
>
> The thing is that a "natural tuning" perfect fifth is a bit different from an "equal temperament tuning" perfect fifth. Also, if you are tuned to "natural tuning" the note G played in the key of C is slightly different to the note G played in the key of D. So "equal temperament" allows interesting key changes and so on.
>
> To answer the quesion, Bach's Cminor Fugue. They were going to put it on the voyager space ship, but decided that that would be showing off.
>
> youtube.com/watch?v=JcFHuUJE0mU&
>
> The fugue starts at about 1:20
>
> Y.
Thanks for that. Yes, I know quite a bit about Pythagorus and Bach on this (just haven't read anything about it for some years). I can play a few of the 24 preludes (especially the easy but wonderful first one in C) but NONE of the fugues!
In reply to JJL:
The book? An intellectual triumph indeed but perhaps something musical by Bach - The Art of Fugue?
> (In reply to Blue Straggler)
>
> Godel Escher Bach - an eternal braid
>
> Godel Escher Bach - an eternal braid
The book? An intellectual triumph indeed but perhaps something musical by Bach - The Art of Fugue?
In reply to Southern Man:
Bishop Brennan?
> Hard to believe but I know someone - of apparently sound mind - who doesn't like it!
Bishop Brennan?
I think "universal" is supposed to mean "globally". I am not sure that the good people of Vanuatu, Kamchatka or Tonga would be all that entranced by some of these very Western-European examples!
In reply to Blue Straggler: continuing the universal theme: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Starry_Night must be up there?
In reply to Darron:
youtube.com/watch?v=Rj-4t9drUlM&
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux)
>
> Beatles's Yesterday
>
> Beatles's Yesterday
youtube.com/watch?v=Rj-4t9drUlM&
In reply to Kemics: <gasp> nice one
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
> (In reply to Pursued by a bear)
> [...]
>
> The Fibonacci Series etc
>
> The Golden Mean etc
>
Wow! Ta for that. > [...]
>
> The Fibonacci Series etc
>
> The Golden Mean etc
>
In reply to Removed User:
Painting of a song
> (In reply to Removed UserDaithi O Murchu)
>
> This a painting or a song?
>
> This a painting or a song?
Painting of a song
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
But ...you need 9 fingers and a thumb on each hand for that, no?
> (In reply to Yrmenlaf)
> [...]
I can play a few of the 24 preludes (especially the easy but wonderful first one in C) but NONE of the fugues!> [...]
But ...you need 9 fingers and a thumb on each hand for that, no?
Raises the old question as to whether mathematics has been invented by people or discovered by them. If the latter then I can't see how a mathematical construct could be called a 'piece' in the current context.
How about some Bob Marley? Or the tune to 'Happy birthday to you'?
How about some Bob Marley? Or the tune to 'Happy birthday to you'?
In reply to Southern Man:
>
One does not like it either, even though one is of a soundish mind...err hang on, oh....ahem
>
> Hard to believe but I know someone - of apparently sound mind - who doesn't like it!
One does not like it either, even though one is of a soundish mind...err hang on, oh....ahem
In reply to john arran: Now you've put the proverbial cat amongst the pigeon.
In reply to Removed User:
I think the answer, as unbelievable as it might sound, is Mr Bean - at least the earlier editions which were practically short silent movies.
I think the answer, as unbelievable as it might sound, is Mr Bean - at least the earlier editions which were practically short silent movies.
In reply to stonemaster:
No, it's musically very straightforward, with no complex fingering required - except a little more tricky in last two bars, but still only about Grade 2. Mind you, it depends how fast you play it ... Like so much Bach it works well at many different speeds, even very slow. At higher speeds the first beat of each bar becomes more and more important, and almost spells out a different tune.
> (In reply to Gordon Stainforth)
> [...]
> I can play a few of the 24 preludes (especially the easy but wonderful first one in C) but NONE of the fugues!
>
> But ...you need 9 fingers and a thumb on each hand for that, no?
> [...]
> I can play a few of the 24 preludes (especially the easy but wonderful first one in C) but NONE of the fugues!
>
> But ...you need 9 fingers and a thumb on each hand for that, no?
No, it's musically very straightforward, with no complex fingering required - except a little more tricky in last two bars, but still only about Grade 2. Mind you, it depends how fast you play it ... Like so much Bach it works well at many different speeds, even very slow. At higher speeds the first beat of each bar becomes more and more important, and almost spells out a different tune.
In reply to Southern Man: yeah, not sure the rioters agreed with you back in the day!
In reply to MJ:
Hmmm. Not sure the logos are so much acclaimed as recognised and I don't think the bible will win but would certainly have a reasonable run at it especially if it is just the old testament.
How about the music to the Hovis advert. Is there anyone who doesn't like that?
Hmmm. Not sure the logos are so much acclaimed as recognised and I don't think the bible will win but would certainly have a reasonable run at it especially if it is just the old testament.
How about the music to the Hovis advert. Is there anyone who doesn't like that?
In reply to Removed User:
The Fibonacci series is amazing, but not mysterious, it is just what happens when the memory is limited to just the previous. I love it though, it makes me happier than I can explain.
The Fibonacci series is amazing, but not mysterious, it is just what happens when the memory is limited to just the previous. I love it though, it makes me happier than I can explain.
In reply to Removed User:
Just to put meat on the bones of my earlier mention of it, here's that opening Prelude in C by Bach:
youtube.com/watch?v=RG3gTPalrls&
and the kind of daft fun people have had with it for aeons:
youtube.com/watch?v=zBeVpp1SIMI&
jethro tull and Shlomo Gronich:
youtube.com/watch?v=zp6cX3vGByU&
on guitar:
youtube.com/watch?v=xep0vvhCiXw&
double bass:
youtube.com/watch?v=2o7WxR5Atu8&
upside down and backwards:
youtube.com/watch?v=gYZIK8bF86k&
(well the thread was about 'a universally acclaimed piece' wasn't it?)
Just to put meat on the bones of my earlier mention of it, here's that opening Prelude in C by Bach:
youtube.com/watch?v=RG3gTPalrls&
and the kind of daft fun people have had with it for aeons:
youtube.com/watch?v=zBeVpp1SIMI&
jethro tull and Shlomo Gronich:
youtube.com/watch?v=zp6cX3vGByU&
on guitar:
youtube.com/watch?v=xep0vvhCiXw&
double bass:
youtube.com/watch?v=2o7WxR5Atu8&
upside down and backwards:
youtube.com/watch?v=gYZIK8bF86k&
(well the thread was about 'a universally acclaimed piece' wasn't it?)
In reply to john arran:
Which was the reason behind my nomination of the golden section (or golden mean, if you prefer). The mathematics underpinning it is interesting but whether invented or discovered, it's the way this has been used that makes it a valid nomination, for me at least.
But you can then argue against it by saying it's a tool that underpins visual and acoustic art rather than the art itself. But that's a separate discussion, really.
And thanks Gordon, Blue Straggler, Yrmenlaf et al for the posts about mathematics and music. I shall be doing my homework about this. The book mentioned earlier is now on the reading list!
T.
> Raises the old question as to whether mathematics has been invented by people or discovered by them. If the latter then I can't see how a mathematical construct could be called a 'piece' in the current context.
Which was the reason behind my nomination of the golden section (or golden mean, if you prefer). The mathematics underpinning it is interesting but whether invented or discovered, it's the way this has been used that makes it a valid nomination, for me at least.
But you can then argue against it by saying it's a tool that underpins visual and acoustic art rather than the art itself. But that's a separate discussion, really.
And thanks Gordon, Blue Straggler, Yrmenlaf et al for the posts about mathematics and music. I shall be doing my homework about this. The book mentioned earlier is now on the reading list!
T.
In reply to Pursued by a bear:
I think that comes down to simulation theory. The idea that the universe has been programmed, there was something recently where they reckon they had found coding at a subatomic level that mirrors some kind of web coding....but this is all pretty half remembered pub chat
Led Zeppelin IV
Dr. Zhivago
I think that comes down to simulation theory. The idea that the universe has been programmed, there was something recently where they reckon they had found coding at a subatomic level that mirrors some kind of web coding....but this is all pretty half remembered pub chat
Led Zeppelin IV
Dr. Zhivago
In reply to Kemics: In terms of photography (specifically war photography) I think the sequence 'One ride on papa 13' by , I think Larry Burrows, does it for me.
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
How can mathematics be seen as a "piece of art"? It's hardly man made and hardly artistic. As for music, none is universal... so really I don't think the OP's question can be answered just yet.. even in Britain the majority never listen deliberately (as opposed to hearing accidentally) any classical music, let alone enough to have a preferred piece... and however much I like Bob Marley I have to admit that this is not universal. The same can be said for any other art form really.
So an unanswerable question until human civilization becomes more universal, hence my flippant suggestion of Yorkshire, a magnificent creation of human art but not universally admired as such, whatever some Yorkshiremen may think.
How can mathematics be seen as a "piece of art"? It's hardly man made and hardly artistic. As for music, none is universal... so really I don't think the OP's question can be answered just yet.. even in Britain the majority never listen deliberately (as opposed to hearing accidentally) any classical music, let alone enough to have a preferred piece... and however much I like Bob Marley I have to admit that this is not universal. The same can be said for any other art form really.
So an unanswerable question until human civilization becomes more universal, hence my flippant suggestion of Yorkshire, a magnificent creation of human art but not universally admired as such, whatever some Yorkshiremen may think.
In reply to Removed User:
If it's maths then Pi must be up there with the fibonnaci sequence.
Art/ music etc - Beethoven's 9th?
If it's maths then Pi must be up there with the fibonnaci sequence.
Art/ music etc - Beethoven's 9th?
In reply to Al Evans:
Yes what a great - and terrible - photo.
> (In reply to Kemics) In terms of photography (specifically war photography) I think the sequence 'One ride on papa 13' by , I think Larry Burrows, does it for me.
Yes what a great - and terrible - photo.
In reply to Removed User:
How about Toy Story?
Universal critical acclaim, it has something for everyone and I don't think I've ever met a person who doesn't like it.
How about Toy Story?
Universal critical acclaim, it has something for everyone and I don't think I've ever met a person who doesn't like it.
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Well, I didn't say it was (though someone else raised the Fibonacci series and we had an interesting discussion about that and how it related to art)
> (In reply to Gordon Stainforth)
>
> How can mathematics be seen as a "piece of art"? It's hardly man made and hardly artistic.
>
> How can mathematics be seen as a "piece of art"? It's hardly man made and hardly artistic.
Well, I didn't say it was (though someone else raised the Fibonacci series and we had an interesting discussion about that and how it related to art)
In reply to eltankos:
Beethoven's 9th is certainly central to western culture, but not the whole world. (Bruce's point).
Shakespeare is interesting as that seems to cross boundaries more easily. I'm thinking of Kurosawa's versions with very little text.
Beethoven's 9th is certainly central to western culture, but not the whole world. (Bruce's point).
Shakespeare is interesting as that seems to cross boundaries more easily. I'm thinking of Kurosawa's versions with very little text.
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
PS. to last. Problem is that the diatonic scale (Bach's achievement) - central to western music (classical and pop alike) - is that it is not culturally universal, though all 'westernised' cultures have embraced it. e.g. Japan and other parts of the far east.
PS. to last. Problem is that the diatonic scale (Bach's achievement) - central to western music (classical and pop alike) - is that it is not culturally universal, though all 'westernised' cultures have embraced it. e.g. Japan and other parts of the far east.
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
... and Africa. Kimmy Skota's voice is totally awesome. (And very neatly, Gounod's Ave Maria is based directly on the Bach Prelude I was going on about above).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0_HYBCgW9Q&feature=related
... and Africa. Kimmy Skota's voice is totally awesome. (And very neatly, Gounod's Ave Maria is based directly on the Bach Prelude I was going on about above).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0_HYBCgW9Q&feature=related
In reply to Bruce Hooker: I've often heard maths refered to as an art & although used by science, it isn't really a science itself. And some parts of maths are beautiful although unfortunately most of us don't study it to a sufficient level to appreciate much of it
In reply to Byronius Maximus:
I'm one for a start and there are many others I imagine, syrupy Disney style adulation of US pseudo moral values.
Sorry, just another rubbishy cartoon to addle the minds of our poor children.
IMO.
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux)
>
> How about Toy Story?
>
> Universal critical acclaim, it has something for everyone and I don't think I've ever met a person who doesn't like it.
>
> How about Toy Story?
>
> Universal critical acclaim, it has something for everyone and I don't think I've ever met a person who doesn't like it.
I'm one for a start and there are many others I imagine, syrupy Disney style adulation of US pseudo moral values.
Sorry, just another rubbishy cartoon to addle the minds of our poor children.
IMO.
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
The OP said he was thinking of works of art, when he refused (with reason) my suggestion.
The OP said he was thinking of works of art, when he refused (with reason) my suggestion.
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Actually, I agree with your linguistic point. The term 'piece' used in that way in the title of the thread really grated with me when I first saw it. Like you I thought piece of what? Very sloppy English, so sloppy in fact that it doesn't make sense.
Actually, I agree with your linguistic point. The term 'piece' used in that way in the title of the thread really grated with me when I first saw it. Like you I thought piece of what? Very sloppy English, so sloppy in fact that it doesn't make sense.
In reply to Doug:
Well I suppose so, but this would go over the heads of most of us
So hardly universal.
Well I suppose so, but this would go over the heads of most of us
So hardly universal.
In reply to Doug:
Well, art is by definition a construct (though I often like to think metaphorically of nature as a kind of artist), and maths almost certainly is not. The fibonacci series and golden mean, referred to above, exist completely objectively, logically and naturally, irrespective of human beings. That ratio of 1:1.618.. is just 'out there' whether we like it or not.
> (In reply to Bruce Hooker) I've often heard maths refered to as an art & although used by science, it isn't really a science itself. And some parts of maths are beautiful although unfortunately most of us don't study it to a sufficient level to appreciate much of it
Well, art is by definition a construct (though I often like to think metaphorically of nature as a kind of artist), and maths almost certainly is not. The fibonacci series and golden mean, referred to above, exist completely objectively, logically and naturally, irrespective of human beings. That ratio of 1:1.618.. is just 'out there' whether we like it or not.
In reply to Removed User:
I think that the Fibonacci sequence is pretty amazing: it (and the Golden Ratio) has its fingers in so many pies. I'm sort of thinking that the discovery of the sequence (and the way it permeates our understanding and appreciation of mathematics and the arts) is the "universally acclaimed piece", rather than the sequence itself.
Interesting too, that an artwork that makes us laugh or want to dance seems less "worthy" than one that inspires deeper emotion.
Y.
I think that the Fibonacci sequence is pretty amazing: it (and the Golden Ratio) has its fingers in so many pies. I'm sort of thinking that the discovery of the sequence (and the way it permeates our understanding and appreciation of mathematics and the arts) is the "universally acclaimed piece", rather than the sequence itself.
Interesting too, that an artwork that makes us laugh or want to dance seems less "worthy" than one that inspires deeper emotion.
Y.
In reply to Removed User: Strange, does nobody else like Puccini's Madame Butterfly?
In reply to Blue Straggler:
Universally acclaimed?
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux)
>
>
> Whale "song"?
>
>
> Whale "song"?
Universally acclaimed?
In reply to Removed User:
By the Welsh. No sorry, by whales; my mistake.
T.
> Universally acclaimed?
By the Welsh. No sorry, by whales; my mistake.
T.
In reply to Yrmenlaf: I'd definitely join the meta-club going for the Fibonacci sequence, though if forced to a pick a single "creative work", it would be one of the legendary 'greats' of classical music, because modern music will be looked down on by some, whereas some of the greatest classical pieces seem to captivate even rap- or drum-and-bass lovers. Art, literature and poetry have always seemed more subjective and therefore reader/viewer-dependent, so I'd have to stick with music! As for which piece, there are a fair number, from which I couldn't pick one single one.
In reply to David Ponting:
But it isn't for you to pick. It is the cumulative appreciation that counts. So if you appreciated both Beethoven's 5th and Straus's 10th (I'm making these up) then that is fine. Question is; do more people appreciate the 5th or the 10th and is it universally acclaimed and is it the most universally acclaimed piece of art?
But it isn't for you to pick. It is the cumulative appreciation that counts. So if you appreciated both Beethoven's 5th and Straus's 10th (I'm making these up) then that is fine. Question is; do more people appreciate the 5th or the 10th and is it universally acclaimed and is it the most universally acclaimed piece of art?
In reply to Removed User: That was sort of my point - I meant to say that I didn't know enough to pick the universal favourite, rather than I couldn't pick my personal favourite!
In reply to crossdressingrodney:
+1
> (In reply to JJL)
> [...]
>
> Even more amazing with a plus sign.
> [...]
>
> Even more amazing with a plus sign.
+1
In reply to Removed User:
The trouble is that most of will come to this with a western bias but I would pick:
Music:The Ode to Joy, the Hallelujah chorus
Art:Mona Lisa
Play: Romeo and Juliet
Building: Taj Mahal
That are recognised and appreciated on a global scale.Can anyone think of more non Western "pieces" that have achieved this status?
The trouble is that most of will come to this with a western bias but I would pick:
Music:The Ode to Joy, the Hallelujah chorus
Art:Mona Lisa
Play: Romeo and Juliet
Building: Taj Mahal
That are recognised and appreciated on a global scale.Can anyone think of more non Western "pieces" that have achieved this status?
In reply to Removed User:
This has got me thinking about the longevity of art.
Anyone who wants can view paintings tens of thousands of years old (and when Picasso did so, he declared "We have learned nothing"). We can, however, directly compare the paintings in the Cresswell Caverns (for example) with Picasso, and make a judgement as to which is the most "Universally Acclaimed Piece"
We can see and touch sculpture, again tens of thousands of years old. So in the same way, we can compare the Orkney Venus and the work of Henry Moore or Barbara Hepworth, for example, and make a judgement (is there a "Universally acclaimed" piece of sculpture: Easter Island?)
We can't hear music from more than about 150 years ago (although we can reconstruct music - with varying degrees of accuracy) at least 1500 years old). So we can directly compare Caruso and McCartney. But we cannot hear Bach playing his Cminor fugue. We can see the Lindesfarne Gospels, but we cannot hear the the plainchant that "goes with it" (although we can hear scholarly reconstructions of the plainchant)
There's an argument that says that the Cresswell cave paintings or Orkney Venus were created for practical reasons (to gain the favour of the gods). Does this qualify/disqualify their universal acclaim?
Y.
This has got me thinking about the longevity of art.
Anyone who wants can view paintings tens of thousands of years old (and when Picasso did so, he declared "We have learned nothing"). We can, however, directly compare the paintings in the Cresswell Caverns (for example) with Picasso, and make a judgement as to which is the most "Universally Acclaimed Piece"
We can see and touch sculpture, again tens of thousands of years old. So in the same way, we can compare the Orkney Venus and the work of Henry Moore or Barbara Hepworth, for example, and make a judgement (is there a "Universally acclaimed" piece of sculpture: Easter Island?)
We can't hear music from more than about 150 years ago (although we can reconstruct music - with varying degrees of accuracy) at least 1500 years old). So we can directly compare Caruso and McCartney. But we cannot hear Bach playing his Cminor fugue. We can see the Lindesfarne Gospels, but we cannot hear the the plainchant that "goes with it" (although we can hear scholarly reconstructions of the plainchant)
There's an argument that says that the Cresswell cave paintings or Orkney Venus were created for practical reasons (to gain the favour of the gods). Does this qualify/disqualify their universal acclaim?
Y.
In reply to Postmanpat:
Terracotta Army. Pyramids.
Anything involving language is harder due to greater cultural variation and English dominance internationally. Film - Seven Samurai?
> That are recognised and appreciated on a global scale.Can anyone think of more non Western "pieces" that have achieved this status?
Terracotta Army. Pyramids.
Anything involving language is harder due to greater cultural variation and English dominance internationally. Film - Seven Samurai?
In reply to Gone:
I would go with something like the Pyramids too or maybe the temples at Angkor Wat, is there anybody that knows of these things that doesn't think they are amazing feats of architecture?
I would go with something like the Pyramids too or maybe the temples at Angkor Wat, is there anybody that knows of these things that doesn't think they are amazing feats of architecture?
In reply to Removed User: I was thiking about this driving to work the other day and it suddenly came to me...what about the lascaux cave paintings. is there anyone who doesn't have some sort of awestricken admiration for these pictures?
In reply to Pursued by a bear: does it link to music? yes it does, Bartok in particular. The intervals in the third movement of his concerto for orchestra are all fibonaci sequences.
In reply to Removed User: A toothbrush!
In reply to Removed User:
I'm surprised War and Peace hasn't been mentioned yet, I thought this was a tremendous work (part 2 of the epilogue does get a bit tiresome though) of unrivalled scope.
I'm surprised War and Peace hasn't been mentioned yet, I thought this was a tremendous work (part 2 of the epilogue does get a bit tiresome though) of unrivalled scope.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...