Talk:Eye music

Music theory Low‑importance

	Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Music theory, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of music theory, theory terminology, music theorists, and musical analysis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Music theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Music theoryTemplate:WikiProject Music theoryMusic theory articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

Augenmusik[edit]

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)[reply]

English or German title[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Removal of word-painting as eye music[edit]

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)[reply]

Missing Score[edit]

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?