what does ballet mean?

[The_librarian]

Originally Posted by Campestral

the idea is left up to the perfomer which makes is pretentious

Surely the same can be said of music, all of it is left up to the performer, thus they are responsible tfor the subject, and the product, so are all musicians pretetious?

[qoute] because a performer must have a subject and ballet relies on the music which is already written for them and the movement of the body to the art is only an interpretation and the body has less limits than the scope of music so it's confined within those limits. this is why humans like music because it's beyond the realms of physics[/quote]


All art is about interpretation, from the view of the spectator.

Dance and music are intrinsicly intertwined, Movment, rythm.

Indeed the foundation of music may well have been due to the evolution of dance and vice versa, each grew as the other did, though maybe I am blowing out my arse, but its a personal thing, I see art in all its forms, as a path towards personal discovery, not an absolute truth.

[endless psych]

Originally Posted by Campestral

you said it yourself! music is beyond physics because emotions are. but the limitations of dance are more constricted than those of music so that is why music is a much more prevalant art form and why dance is still primitive 'cause dancers don't know how to portrey emtions like musicians do. i would like it if they did but i will only agree once you point me in the direction of a ballet that can compete with music

The physical limitations of dance perhaps. But the emotional limitations? Nah.

[Campestral]

but is it possible in the realms of discovery that everything we know isn't truthfull so all our understanding might not be truthfull and the only true art is the undisputable arts i.e music and painting? all the other stuff might be pretentious and makes us gullible's travels

ballet reminds me of a sonic youth song, eric's. i can't see anything at all, that's all that's important, it looks pretty good to me

[poprock]

You think music and/or painting are indisputable?

Fucksake.

Everything creative can be and is subject to categorisation and arbitrary rulemaking. It’s human nature to classify and constrain. Which is fine, because that also fosters rebellion, ensuring that both extremes (and every point inbetween) are fulfilled.

[endless psych]

Originally Posted by Campestral

the only true art is the undisputable arts i.e music and painting?

Whose being pretentious now?

[poprock]

Maybe the bloke who actually thinks there is such a thing as absolute truth?

Just a hunch.

[Campestral]

so poprock, if you realise what art is can you explain ballet?

[The_librarian]

Originally Posted by Campestral

but is it possible in the realms of discovery that everything we know isn't truthfull so all our understanding might not be truthfull and the only true art is the undisputable arts i.e music and painting? all the other stuff might be pretentious and makes us gullible's travels

I'm trying to understand exactly what you mean here, are you saying that dance is not a true form of art, and that only music and painting are?

If so then I will have to respectfully disagree, all art is about expression, and dance allows all people to display their own feelings, and get all their emotions to the surface, much in their same way as musicians, and painters do.

Indeed personally i see dance as a more pure form, as dance requires no training it is all about release, and is a spontanious show of emotion, at least for the majority of us. Yet it also has the ability to become much more rigid, following the rules that can be imposed on everything by society.

That may however just be my interpretation as someone who loves to dance, to release my pent up emotions, and to express my feelings about life.

Yet I also use other ways to do this from drawing, writing as a more permenant record of exactly how I felt at the time. Which is essentially what all art is, an expression of the moment of it's creation.

More formalized dance is just a recreation of what someone felt at a particular moment. As is music when replayed, tainted with what has happened since

[Campestral]

the style of dance you are explaingin is the simple idea i was on about. it doesn'tr compare with the major arts like music, poetry or paint. dance is something anyone can do so you can't say that it's a deep form of expression. it's only one that is easily accessible. ballet is the one i think is pretentious because it tries to assume the status of the majors and pretentious people who can't comprehend real art would like to behold it so as to give themselves some justification

[Potatojunkie]

Anyone can make music, paint a picture, or write a poem. Most people will be shit at it, just like most people are shit at dancing.

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by Campestral

the style of dance you are explaingin is the simple idea i was on about. it doesn'tr compare with the major arts like music, poetry or paint. dance is something anyone can do so you can't say that it's a deep form of expression. it's only one that is easily accessible. ballet is the one i think is pretentious because it tries to assume the status of the majors and pretentious people who can't comprehend real art would like to behold it so as to give themselves some justification

Campy, dance has been around for as long as painting or music, if not longer. Creating art without anything other then your body is probably the truest form of expression, because you are not using tools or instruments to express your feelings and beliefs.

There are limits, of course - Jimmy McGoth trashing away to My Chemical Romanace in the Catty probably isn't creating what most people would consider Art, but then nether are a lot of people who aren't good at painting or playing an instrument. I know I'm certainly not creating art when I attempt to play guitar.

[Campestral]

this is my piont though, dance has been about since humans could stand up but they only started dancing once they grabbed a drum so music came first and dance doesn't make sense without music so it relies on it ergo it doesn't have the same independent quality that music has, and painting is independent too because it neither relies on dance or music. when has dance ever relied on itself and other people appreciatted it?

[The_librarian]

Originally Posted by Campestral

this is my piont though, dance has been about since humans could stand up but they only started dancing once they grabbed a drum so music came first and dance doesn't make sense without music so it relies on it ergo it doesn't have the same independent quality that music has, and painting is independent too because it neither relies on dance or music. when has dance ever relied on itself and other people appreciatted it?

Is it not possibly true that the reason that man grabbed a drum is due to the sound and rythm that he could create by the movement of his body came first.

The claping of hands may have came first, as a way of keeping the timing for dancing, but we will never know, as it was so long ago. Though evidence may be seen in the fact that young children are able to keep a simple beat in this way.

As i have said before though, this may be tainted as I am a lover of dance in all it's forms, from, the free flow forms that are thrown on dance floors across the world, to ballroom, to ballet. Hell I used to dance in my cot as a baby, and still dance in my sleep, regardless of the presence of music.

[Campestral]

you make an interesting point, babies clapping hands, but aren't they doing that because their parents sing that song clap hands to them after they heard drums and music? i think the most salient question about song and dance still remains. what do most people prefer?

[The_librarian]

Personaly dance came first, the rythms and movments, from claping to stomping of the feet lead to the creation of percusion, then to the use of voice and on to the creation of instruments.

Either that or they both evolved at the same time, side by side and are totaly inseperable, as a means of expressing a full moment, as the visual, and the audio, are both needed to fill all the senses.