sábado, 12 de diciembre de 2009

Explaining art

Sometimes I receive compliments about my piano recitals that I talk to the public, explaining the music. I don't know if explaining music or arts in general deserves to be congratulated. Perhaps it does, if the one who does it is an academician or intellectual. But not artists, I think.In fact, what I talked during my piano recitals has nothing to do with explaining music. It is like a monologue about other things which is connected to music. I don't have anything to say about my music anymore; I have written all down in the form of musical notes on paper.

I think music expresses those which cannot be expressed thru words. Besides, if it could be explained, why listen to the music? I would like my music to be able to communicate with its audience directly, without having to be explained what the music is about. Hopefully it works that way.

Art is like sex, and rationalizing it is like masturbating. Yes it does give you orgasm, (perhaps more to him who explains it and not so much to the listener/reader), but that's fake orgasm. In fact, that's why I call music critics "The Great Masturbator". Sorry for borrowing the title of the great masterpiece by Salvador Dali, since music critics are much worthless than that. Most of the time they even misinterpreted the music they are trying to explain to the reader, and their opinion is as useless as the product of masturbation : nobody derives pleasure from it. It's just wasted.