Monday, January 30, 2006

Critics and musicians

I read somewhere (it's buried in my notes and will be found for my thesis, but not here) that music criticism is more about literature than about music. Thinking about it, I do believe that this is true - we talk about music, but criticism itself is really about the process of writing, using that as the form of communication.

So does that mean I'm not a musician anymore?

I know that changing directions certainly doesn't take away anything that I learned, or make me less able, but in defining myself, I wonder if I shouldn't be making the mental switch to being a writer.

I find that slightly scary because I don't believe that I'm a terribly GOOD one yet. Then again, I wasn't a terribly good violinist either, so maybe it should be ok.

Whether I'm a writer or not, I have to get back to producing a 150 page thesis. So, I'll be writing something, anyway.

3 comments:

margaret kelley said...

you can be both, no?

lily said...

You ARE both. And you do them with grace and aplomb--and as a struggling writer myself, I dare say you do them both exceedingly well. Never doubt that, as there is only one Claire Blaustein.

arts_guy said...

Don't underestimate the value of a body of a literature on any genre (be it music, dance, architecture, etc.)

Is criticism more about literature.... Probably yes, does it make not a musician anymore, well you're still playing right? I would argue that your writing is merely a part of your artistic practice. This is how my visual arts friends justify the fact that they write, curate and do all this other stuff and also make art.