Music and Paintings

Recorded music or performed music though are different still the sound that comes out of a recording is considered music and one can get the same benefits as if listening to a live perfromance though with a different effect.

How is a recording different than a painting? Aren't they both the products of a 'performance'?

So, if I'm understanding right:

A painting is a lesser art form because it doesn't perform?

But music is a greater art because through this performing, the listener is allowed to experience this "spiritual energy" as you call it?

Why is it that the message of a painter dies after the painting has been completed? The problem with this analogy is that a painter is more like a composer. People don't watch a composer compose music, just as a painter doesn't paint in front of an audience (most of the time. Performance painting might interest a few, but let's leave that pot to boil.)

So, what's a more apt conclusion is that a painting is more analogous to performers. Whenever a painting is on display, it is performing the artist's work. Unlike music, which is taken in through the ear, this is taken in through the eye. Unless this mystical "spiritual energy" can't be transmitted through the eyes (and I don't see why not. Your definition of spiritual seems to be that the painting needs to glorify some sort of higher power, and there's definitely a lot of art that does that) then a painting can most definitely display this "spiritual energy" just as well as music can.

I think that the ultimate difference is that within music the listener is connecting to an energy that is alive and that travels in time.

What about the time spent looking at a painting? Are you saying that since the artist doesn't control that, it's a lesser art? Just because the painting isn't moving, that doesn't mean that it's not "alive."

This energy is new every time it gets played even if it was played thousands of time , yet it always comes to life with a fresh feeling.

I'm sure your argument here is that every time a painting is shown, it's the same damn painting, but when music is played, it's different players. But what about the fact that what the composer wants is never going to be changed, even though players may change their wishes? With this, art is a higher form of art because the creator's wishes can be expressed fully and will never change (hoping that the painting survives any dangers.)

With music , the soul doesn’t have to go through the physical part in order to get a message or meaning to enjoy it. Right there and then as soon as the melody begins, even the simplest of tunes has the power to ignite the soul with pleasure and harmony.

This doesn't make any sense. Music has to be heard before it can be interpreted as spiritual. By this definition, a deaf person would feel spiritual even without being able to hear the music. It doesn't happen. Now, I consider myself religious, and I do believe that music can have a good impact on spiritual development for someone. But this music needs to enter the ear canal because we have to physically hear it. A painting needs to be seen in order to gain spiritual development from it.

Also:

Cowboy... are you trying to change my mind? I hope not.

I'm sure no one here is trying to change your mind. You stated a claim, and we are arguing. Instead of defending your claim, you're bringing up a large amount of logical fallacies and insults. I don't think you're going to have a fun time in English Comp II in college if you haven't had it by now.

In response to Sauls detailed description of the orchestra in that Temple or whatever it was....ok...great... but that does not mean the same thing doesn't happen with art.

I don't know if you're familiar with Aboriginal Australian religion but it is one of the most moving religions i have ever studied. For them art is a huge part of the culture. They paint in order to stay in touch with what is called the dreaming and their spriritual ancestors. They pass this skill on to their children and it has been maintained since the beginning of their time here (around 60 000 years ago). A quote from an Aboriginal person talking about his painting " When I paint I connect my soul with the dreaming, without my painting I would be nothing..just a lost soul floating around in the world"

I want you to tell me now, Saul, how this art is not spiritual?? Because it seems to me from that example and your example combined, both music and painting have "spiritual energy" and cannot be compared for two reasons. They are TOO DIFFERENT and this is almost as bad as trying to argue about whose religion is correct...IT CANNOT BE PROVED!! ok??????

When I was a kid, I loved to get inside pictures. During that time, my family was living in my grandmother's apartment and there was a picture on the wall, just above the bed. Sometimes I used to look for 20 or more minutes at the picture, getting inside of it and imagining it alive - seeing things moving, hearing things, trying to make them clearer and sense the picture in all possible ways, with all senses. Sometimes I was even extending the picture in my mind, thus creating a whole region for myself where I was walking, seeing and hearing other people, animals, things, whatever I wish, giving my sort of representation to the abstract ideas in my mind. And sometimes I still do it, although it's not so easy as before - I am busier now, not so patient and relaxed.

I also write and soon started to deal with design and photography. And when writing or composing, I imagine and try to use more senses in order to translate metaphorically my ideas and concepts and to give them life.

Whether something is spiritual for you or not, depends on whether your spirit is ready to receive in that way, on that particular frequency, that's all.

Wow...;) just wow...

I'm not even gonna bother arguing the whole 'some arts are better than others' junk

However, I would like to state that I have NEVER come across any artist, of any type (painter, musician,writer..) aspiring or established that didn't appreciate the other artforms. They realize that each is unique but fundamentally tries to COMMUNICATE something and so in the end all art is equal.

I would like to know what exactly is meant by "spiritual"

I have a lot of problems with words like spirit, soul, geist, raison d'etre and the like being tossed around. They mean so much and so different things to different people.

Art is very beautiful. Music though has a sence of deep life, the effects of moving time, a feeling of direction, but openness maaaaaaaaaan.