The Instigator
BoardPlank
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points
The Contender
Xenofloppy
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Is Music an equal form of art compared to other forms?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
BoardPlank
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/8/2013 Category: Arts
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 945 times Debate No: 41925
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

BoardPlank

Pro

1st round is acceptance, Good Luck.
Xenofloppy

Con

Challenge accepted.
Debate Round No. 1
BoardPlank

Pro

I believe that Art in any form should do 1 (or both) of 2 things. They should either Connect with people in a relate able way, or they should make a person think differently. Music can do both of those things easily. Most songs are written to relate to people (e.g Love songs, Sad songs). Most kinds of music is written that way. More "sophisticated" genres such as classical are usually written the other way, with the exception of some other songs. You can hear a song and instantly know what the writer was trying to portray. Other forms or art are very symbolic with meanings that you have to think about to understand. In music there are very obvious messages with some having double meanings, something most other forms do not do often.
Xenofloppy

Con

I'd like to point out a few things in Instigator's argument.

"I believe that Art in any form should do 1 (or both) of 2 things. They should either Connect with people in a relate able way, or they should make a person think differently. Music can do both of those things easily."

This is subjective. Not everyone is moved in an emotional way by listening to music. I personally, find myself completely untouched or unchanged when I listen to modern music.

"You can hear a song and instantly know what the writer was trying to portray."

This is probably false. Take the song "Fireworks", by Katy Perry for example. At a first listen you may think they are saying that everyone is special, and you just need to find your talent.

However, from some more analysis, we can say this is wrong. Let's take a look:

"Do you ever feel like a plastic bag
Drifting through the wind, wanting to start again?
Do you ever feel, feel so paper thin
Like a house of cards, one blow from caving in?"

"Do you ever feel like a plastic bag, Drifting through the wind, wanting to start again" could refer to one feeling useless in life.
"Do you ever feel, feel so paper thin, Like a house of cards, one blow from caving in" could refer to one being mentally unstable, which is supported by the: "Like a house of cards, one blow from caving in"

Next:

Do you ever feel already buried deep six feet under?
Scream but no one seems to hear a thing
Do you know that there's still a chance for you
'Cause there's a spark in you?

This is where people make the assumption that everyone is special, and you just need to find your talent. But take a look more:

"'Cause, baby, you're a firework"

Demonstrated from this video, a firework lasts approximately one to two or more seconds.[1]

This is my interpretation:
One will seem useless in life, but when they find their talent/meaning, they will be acknowledged for awhile until they disappear again.
Not what you originally interpreted as, yes? I'd explain this in much futher detail, but I'd run out of characters/lose your attention.

Songs have many different ways of interpreting them. One cannot simply interpret a single meaning out of a song that easily.

You say "Other forms or art are very symbolic with meanings that you have to think about to understand.", yet this is true with music as well.

"In music there are very obvious messages with some having double meanings, something most other forms do not do often" is also false because, as I already explained, like a poem, sometimes music takes some analysis to understand. If you want me to, I will literally get a song of your request and interpret the lyrics a way that most people didn't think of. Problem is, one can't do it on the fly, especially songs with lyrics that are hard to interpret because of one of the following reasons:

1: Reverb
2: Autotune
3: Other Distortion effect
4: Fast speed

Music seems like it fits more into the entertainment section. It's used along cinema/stage entertainment, and it's used to enhance the mood. It doesn't nessecarily connect with the audience or make them think differently, but it's simply there to amplify what is already there.

Outside of cinema/stage entertainment, music can still be considered entertainment. The definition of entertainment is things that mainly give pleasure and delight. Music can do that well, especially more musically complex songs.

I await Instigator's arguments.

Sources:
[1] London 2012 New Year Fireworks




Debate Round No. 2
BoardPlank

Pro

I thank my opponent for the interesting views

You mention how not everyone is moved when listening to music. Yes that is true, but the goal is to have someone be moved, and many people are. This is the same for any other form of art, personally most art does not move me. But there are some who see it as very moving.

Also, you pointed out that music takes analysis to find a meaning,

This is a major part of art in general, with the exception of some works/songs/genres that focus on amazing the viewers/listener.

Wouldn't you agree that meanings behind art need to be analysed to be understood? I am guessing you do since you spent half of your argument stating this. As I said, this is a major element of art, and in any form it is true, painting, sculpting, poetry, music etc.
And what is music? In a way it is poetry set to a melody, rhythm and beat.

You also say that music is more of an entertainment.
I believe that this is the purpose of art, with some art being persuasive. People usually go to art galleries to be entertained. Many forms of art besides music focus on entertainment, Speed painting for example.
A large point of art is to entertain.
Xenofloppy

Con

I'd like to point a few things out.

Though you say that "the goal is to have someone be moved, and many people are", not every piece of music moves people. In fact, there are some songs that outright disgust me (to name a few, "A*s and T*ties" by Three 6 Mafia, "I'm Sexy and I Know It" by LMFAO, you get the point).



You also state:

"Also, you pointed out that music takes analysis to find a meaning, This is a major part of art in general, with the exception of some works/songs/genres that focus on amazing the viewers/listener."

However, this contradicts the statement you said in Round 2,

"You can hear a song and instantly know what the writer was trying to portray."

If one can hear a song instantly and know what the writer was trying to say, yet you say that art takes analysis to find a meaning in the art, doesn't that mean that music is not art?

With those two statements, you have broken your argument completely.

Also, you say this: "You also say that music is more of an entertainment.
I believe that this is the purpose of art, with some art being persuasive. People usually go to art galleries to be entertained. Many forms of art besides music focus on entertainment, Speed painting for example.
A large point of art is to entertain."

However, entertainment's sole purpose is to bring joy, as I stated in the last Round. Art can bring feelings of grief as well, both to the viewers and the artist. Art can do more than just entertain.

I thank my opponent for a interesting debate.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Josh_b 3 years ago
Josh_b
BoardPlankXenofloppyTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro refers to music in the terms of sounds combined in a pleasing manner, con refers to lyrics and poetry. Both sides point to the subjectivity of music and art and agree that music affects each listener differently. The difference in reliable source goes to pro for pleasing sounds and against con for using poetry. The convincing argument also goes to pro for pointing out subjective value. Because nearly all of con's arguments were of subjective value, I consider them to be in favor of pro's resolution.