ForumsDialogue is Action
Welcome to The Forums! Remember, you may post up to 150% of any required number of posts for credit. This summer, therefore, you can post up to 15 times for credit. In general during the school year, five substantive posts are required by each Friday midnight. Have fun!
|Forums are now closed.|
I found our discussion in class about how we determine what qualifies as Für Elise and what does not. In my mind initially, I classified this song as the original first notes but did not consider that it would definitely have to be played on the piano in order for it to “count”. Therefore, I suppose I initially saw this song as the melody that it holds and the calming tone that it brings to its audience. I am still grappling with the revelation that interpretations of this song could still be classified as the true song, and think that it would be an interesting topic of conversation to consider what qualifies as something which is “inspired” by this song versus what is actually classified as the song. I do think that the original piece of the paper which Beethoven wrote the melody on the page which was found. I thought that it was also very interesting how we were so quick to move towards interpreting the story of the song being given to “Elise” despite how we had seen before that the belief in the song’s history is so subjective, as displayed when Chisnell told us that the entire story was speculation. It seems difficult to determine the true beginning and ending of the song based on the power of one’s own opinion that is so relevant in so many of our interpretations of literature.
I really love this music piece. I thought the stories or almost myths about its creation were very interesting. I wonder what actually happened with it. On the question of which version of the song is the “Fur Elise '', I like to think that the original is what he designed to play for her, as told by the story anyways. This is because it has the original thoughts, feelings and intentions of the composer in it. I see every other making of it faster as a performance of that original, which obviously isn’t the same every time.
I've also had a little bit of trouble figuring out what I personally think about this. All throughout class my idea of what was Fur Elise and what wasn't kept changing. I heard it played by the two artists and was thinking that it was obviously still Fur Elise, as they were both playing the same piece. When Mr. Chisnell played us the dubstep version, my thoughts began to change. I began to relate the dubstep version to other pieces of literature, like Red Riding Hood for example. The original Red Riding Hood can be seen as the original Fur Elise. There are many versions of Red Riding Hood, retold in different ways with the same general theme. The dubstep version of Fur Elise felt to me similar to a modernized retelling of Red Riding Hood to appeal to a modern popular audience. It's based off of the same story, but the changes are so severe that it's possible the characters aren't even the same. It's not the same exact story, but can it still be called Red Riding Hood if it's inspired by the same thing?
What Grace said about different variations with the same theme about red riding hood prompted me to yet again rethink how we could define Fur Elise. While music might not have themes in the same way that writing does, it still has an intention behind its creation that is conveyed through the tone and mood of the piece. If an interpretation of a piece of music strays away from that "theme" I think we can then say that it is no longer that piece of music, but a new piece inspired by the original.
I agree with the other posts that state if the "theme" of music is not presented in the same way as the original, it is no longer that piece of music but either a variation of it or a different piece all together. When listening to the techno-version of Fur Elise, I didn't like it and didn't think it appropriately recognized the original song written for piano. I think a lot of music today that is popular comes from classical music tones, but that doesn't make the pop songs we hear on the radio the same thing as the classics they're based off of. For example, Ariana Grande's song "7 Rings" copies a lot of the same rhythms from a more well known piece of music, but her song is not the same as the song from, what I think, is a broadway musical (correct me if I'm wrong). It has different words, a different meaning, and a different chorus completely which is why it may be related to, but is not nearly the sample.
Here's a fun fact that I think is pretty interesting, and goes along with this idea. So, the human brain can never 100% fully process a face- like, for example, if you tried to picture your mother's face, it would probably be a bit scrambled. You will probably be able to picture a few things alone, like her nose, or her hair, but you can't fully put that all together. But isn't that still your mother? Fur Elise may be played with a different intention, or be remixed a thousand times, but is that not still Fur Elise?
That's so interesting! I can kinda see that in myself because I find it a lot easier to remember what someone else looks like than remember what I look like because obviously I'm not constantly looking at a mirror and I'm usually looking at other people more than looking at myself (I don't know maybe that's just me). This makes me think about how people can never completely know if we see the same colors. For example, is my blue the same blue that you see? This isn't even for those who are colorblind vs those who are not. For example, a bunch of people could look at something that is indigo-colored, and if asked if it's blue or violet, depending on who you are asking will depend on the answer because indigo may look more purple to one person and more blue to another. Our interpretations and the ways we perceive the world will always be different, they can never be exactly the same.
I found what Zoe said to be very valid. There are many arguments as to what is the true song and what isn't but maybe its all correct in a way. Even if someone is sure of their own answer as to the true meaning of the song, it can have a completely different effect on someone else's ears or mind just like colors have a different effect on peoples eyes. even though it has a different meaning or effect in different minds, people still recognize it to be Fur Elise. Although it may not convey the same exact emotions Beethoven felt when he was developing it, it sparks up SOME emotion weather it be sadness, contentedness or whatever. How do we know that's not what Beethoven wanted? Do we even know the intention of this song and what it was trying to convey? If not, then how can we determine whats right and wrong?
- Only Substantive Posts earn credit.
- Five posts/week earn 100% for that week.
- Deadlines are Fridays at 11:59 pm.
- Any single week can earn up to 150%:
- Six posts = 120%
- Seven posts = 140%
- Eight posts = 150%
- Nine posts = 150%, etc.
- One successful podcast replaces 5 posts.
- Are usually several thoughtful sentences in length:
- Demonstrate that reading was done or a concept is understood
- Might quote text
- Express a thoughtful idea about that concept/reading
- May be questions, but if so, also speculations
- Demonstrate that reading was done or a concept is understood
- Are constructive and productive to the discussion
- Are supportive of other members and their ideas
- May/should challenge/provoke/take risks in thinking