Mag Uidhir on Performance

Christy Mag Uidhir has recently argued (a) that there is no in principle aesthetic difference between a live performance and a recording of that performance, and (b) that the proper aesthetic object is a type which is instantiated by the performance and potentially repeatable when recordings are pla...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The British journal of aesthetics 2008-07, Vol.48 (3), p.338-345
Main Author: Magnus, P. D.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aesthetics
Mag Uidhir, Christy
Musical performances
Musical recordings
Philosophy
Philosophy of art. Aesthetics
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Christy Mag Uidhir has recently argued (a) that there is no in principle aesthetic difference between a live performance and a recording of that performance, and (b) that the proper aesthetic object is a type which is instantiated by the performance and potentially repeatable when recordings are played back. This paper considers several objections to (a) and finds them lacking. I then consider improvised music, a subject that Mag Uidhir explicitly brackets in his discussion. Improvisation reveals problems with (b), because the performance-event and the performance-type are distinct but equally proper aesthetic objects.
ISSN:0007-0904
1468-2842
DOI:10.1093/aesthj/ayn031