Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 04:48:13 +0000
Subject: Re: Sensuous Metaphor
From: "Michael Pennamacoor" <pennamacoor-AT-enterprise.net>


> THIS MESSAGE IS IN MIME FORMAT. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3088903693_193309_MIME_Part

John Foster presented us with the following recently:

>Music and art in general have these virtual powers of placing into 
>parenthesis all forms of objectivity; thus the power of the interaction 
>enabling secondary illusions as 'sensuous metaphor', and 'harmonic space'....
> 
>Music therefore is a form of symboling which borrows from natural forms.

I'm wondering, (maybe not) on the contrary whether music enables us to think the
("natural") world, to sing it, to at-tune to it. Tuning, ringing, vibing, etc are not
overwhelmingly metaphorical in musical-cum-acoustical language; they arise from the very
substantiality of music itself, as do the sometimes dialogical (canonic polyphony,
antiphonal passages, jazzy-conversational, etc), sometimes monological, 'lines' and
'threads' and 'passages' and 'movements', etc, in the speech of musical composition.
Weaves spun in time: of time, perhaps?

Perhaps the 'literal' is a special form of the metaphorical? In the same sense that
'false' speech (speech that does not speak under the auspices of being) is a special kind
of 'true' speech (that does speak being); that false speech belongs to true speech [in
Parmenides]?

just a thought... [but, of what kind?]

MichaelP

--MS_Mac_OE_3088903693_193309_MIME_Part

HTML VERSION: