In this video podcast we look for clues about objective meaning in music and sacred dance through Gurdjieff’s writings in Beelzebub’s Tales and Meetings With Remarkable Men.
It's interesting to me that certain pieces that make use of specific technique: that of playing a single note with the left hand, a drone, if you will, that must be played freely, relaxingly for it to have any substance...I'm thinking of two pieces in particular.
There is "Prayer and Despair." It appears to me that the only way to listen to this piece is to let that sound wholly into the heart region. Then those intervals that you speak of have a very forceful impact. The chromatic runs almost make me want to jump out of my skin--that i should be doing something with myself. What do you want for yourself? How can I change from who I am to who I wish to be? What must I sacrifice? Do I have the nerve to sharpen that blade? It reminds me how far I am from union.
"The Bokharian Dervish" uses a similar technique, but with an entirely different result. The note is still spinning in the same place, but the darkness has lifted, the distance evaporates . . . I am exactly where I need to be and this life is "all good." The striving, all part of the master game. Hello Friend, Welcome Home.
This is how those music affect me. I don't know how others respond to it. In other words, I believe this is sacred, special music--I am not similarly affected by other works of music. These sort of "provide the pill" each and every time. But I also can't help feeling that I've wired myself to find this music or let it find me at just the right time that made a difference. Entirely cosmically subjective? Is that too against the grain for these talks?
The chapter on “Art” is very weighted, like so much of the book. Though I believe it is objective. My impressions of the inexacatude’s in the different forms of Art, is that they bring us into question with ourselves and with what is in front of us. Why?
Thinking of the cupola sitting on three pillars instead four, Would bring one into question Why? And hopefully a related question of myself and Who am I?
Regarding your second paragraph: this indicates that there are two questions about lawful inexactitudes which Gurdjieff opens up for us in his chapter Art. First is to be able to find them -- which you allude to in the 3 vs 4 pillars story. Second is to understand what they mean -- that is, your question "Why?" I intend to put some attention on these issues in future conversations with Lee: is there a way to address inexactitudes and meaning in a practical way, that is not wiseacring? Gurdjieff, Thomas de Hartmann, and JGBennett left us some important clues to begin an inquiry.
It's interesting to me that certain pieces that make use of specific technique: that of playing a single note with the left hand, a drone, if you will, that must be played freely, relaxingly for it to have any substance...I'm thinking of two pieces in particular.
There is "Prayer and Despair." It appears to me that the only way to listen to this piece is to let that sound wholly into the heart region. Then those intervals that you speak of have a very forceful impact. The chromatic runs almost make me want to jump out of my skin--that i should be doing something with myself. What do you want for yourself? How can I change from who I am to who I wish to be? What must I sacrifice? Do I have the nerve to sharpen that blade? It reminds me how far I am from union.
"The Bokharian Dervish" uses a similar technique, but with an entirely different result. The note is still spinning in the same place, but the darkness has lifted, the distance evaporates . . . I am exactly where I need to be and this life is "all good." The striving, all part of the master game. Hello Friend, Welcome Home.
This is how those music affect me. I don't know how others respond to it. In other words, I believe this is sacred, special music--I am not similarly affected by other works of music. These sort of "provide the pill" each and every time. But I also can't help feeling that I've wired myself to find this music or let it find me at just the right time that made a difference. Entirely cosmically subjective? Is that too against the grain for these talks?
The chapter on “Art” is very weighted, like so much of the book. Though I believe it is objective. My impressions of the inexacatude’s in the different forms of Art, is that they bring us into question with ourselves and with what is in front of us. Why?
Thinking of the cupola sitting on three pillars instead four, Would bring one into question Why? And hopefully a related question of myself and Who am I?
Regarding your second paragraph: this indicates that there are two questions about lawful inexactitudes which Gurdjieff opens up for us in his chapter Art. First is to be able to find them -- which you allude to in the 3 vs 4 pillars story. Second is to understand what they mean -- that is, your question "Why?" I intend to put some attention on these issues in future conversations with Lee: is there a way to address inexactitudes and meaning in a practical way, that is not wiseacring? Gurdjieff, Thomas de Hartmann, and JGBennett left us some important clues to begin an inquiry.