Talk:Eye music

Augenmusik

Anyone for moving this page to Augenmusik (with a redirect from Eye music)? I know that there's a preference for English terms when both English and foreign terms are in common circulation, but I don't know anyone who writes about this technique who doesn't use the German term. Even Donald Martino's composition uses the German term in preference to the English. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 04:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

English or German title

I thought a lot about that myself when I started the entry.

• I decided to follow the Holy Bible in English, i.e., Grove, for consistency with research for laymen (and blessed by Grove for scholars also).

• It's not so scary a word--some people lock up when they see non-English. What kind of tipped my decision is "eye music" is an exact translation, so there is no question of nuance lost, which would have to be explained in English: for example, "sprechestimmung"--"speech" is easy, but then "stimmung"--"voice," "part," "expression," etc. would be a bitch. With Eye music nothing is lost, nor is it as radical as translating all "Allegros" as "Happies."

• That an English-speaking composer uses Augenmusik isn't particularly germane. Hell, I use it too when talking to people who know it (which includes all theorists and composers and musicologists); but if people don't know it they have to remember the translation.

Best, ---Shlishke (talk) 21:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't realize the Grove2 used Eye Music. I guess that gives a lot more influence. In JSTOR music there is a slight preference for Augenmusik over Eye Music and that's what I went with. Given what you say, I'm fine with leaving it here. However, I don't agree with the notion that we should choose less scary versions of words for titles or easier to remember titles; we should use the most commonly used term regardless of how much easier a translation would be to remember. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 23:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Kinderlieder, Fauxbourdon, Weinen, Klagen, Sorgen, Zagen, Concerto Grosso, Urlinie-e [to the tune of

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, which I can't believe is a Wiki entry.]---Shlishke (talk) 07:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

dont forget Auskomponierung and gesamtkunstwerk. And I think wikipedia should be as Borgesian as possible, so supercalifragilisticexpialidocious has as much right to be here as Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis Vajrayosidbhagesuvijahara (talk) 19:48, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Removal of word-painting as eye music

Word-painting is, despite it's "visual" analogy, an aurally perceived phenomenon. While not all listeners will be able to identify the musical characterisation of a word as an instance of the word-painting technique, untrained listeners will (contrary to the previous author's assertion) nevertheless still hear the same phenomenon - they will merely not be able to label it as this particular technique. More crucially, the fact that 'word-painting' creates an aural affect means that it cannot be "eye-music" as defined by this article, which is taken to be a VISUAL aspect of a score that cannot be heard (by ANYONE) in performance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.2.113.146 (talk) 19:34, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Missing Score

Under Graphic Notation there is a mention of a Steiner score "shown here" which isn't actually visible. Was there a copyright issue without consequent text cleanup?