Jazz for aficionados

@alexatpos

I would dare to say that relation between artist, or his work and audience is often not related

Hmm. . . I’m not so sure, now that I’ve had more time to reflect. I found performing equally rewarding and frustrating and for me, that phase was short-lived. However, I’ve known guys who would most likely not play at all were they not able to gig! Performing is where most of the enjoyment lies, for them. On the other hand, one must garner sufficient enjoyment from playing alone in order to accrue the skills necessary to play out and not be laughed off the stage. So this brings us back around to pleasing one’s self.

@stuartk Thanks again for your  insights  from a musician’s perspective! BTW I was at the live Allman Brothers Fillmore East concert and from my memory it was like walking into an alternate reality that I didn’t want to end and which is a great example of what I was trying to communicate in my rather awkward choice of words. At least for me trying to put words to non-verbal experiences is challenging and in my comments it was hurriedly written. So thank you very much again for taking your time to respond. 

@mahgister. Your comment that between musician and audience is very often not related I suppose could apply to any creative work! And I would agree. The in between time-space that Martin Buber speaks to in “I Thou” and his I It I think convincingly expresses that mysterious experience where both participants are changed as a result, but not in any preconceived way. Being unrelated is in my opinion not only true oftentimes but also irrelevant.

@stuartk If we consider an art as a form of expression (that later becomes 'validated' as such thru different reasons, standards, morals and time) and by looking in many forms of it, it seems to me that there many possible conclusions, as well as there are many different men, (artists) why and how people choose to express themself .(thru some art form). Every art form at some point in time was considered as a 'modern' art and not necessarily excepted, neither by public or by critics, so I think that it would be interesting to know what inner forces exactly drove some of the great artist that made them endure in their work despite all odds. As we all know, there are many of them who failed to gain any recognition during their life and still they did not change the way they create. Of course, there are many others who are or were the opposite example. I admit, I am always more intrigued by the ones who lived and created things following their own rules or mindset, but thats probably because of my romanticism. Blame it on my youth.     

Great post! i concur with your analysis according to Buber...

Between musicians and the public there is a mystery space, where the musicians do not enter nor the public but the 2 are transformed by the felt space of meaning, spontaneously created,  by  those playing and by those listening, a space from which their consciousness is excluded .

@mahgister. Your comment that between musician and audience is very often not related I suppose could apply to any creative work! And I would agree. The in between time-space that Martin Buber speaks to in “I Thou” and his I It I think convincingly expresses that mysterious experience where both participants are changed as a result, but not in any preconceived way. Being unrelated is in my opinion not only true oftentimes but also irrelevant.