5 ms·

(time to stick out my ignorant amateur neck for chopping) I'm sorry if this feels like the wrong tone, but how familiar are you with Japanese aesthetics and ph

by crdb 11y ago

(time to stick out my ignorant amateur neck for chopping) I'm sorry if this feels like the wrong tone, but how familiar are you with Japanese aesthetics and philosophy? I am only slightly familiar, but my understanding is that kaiseki ryori is not about "tasty" but a form of philosophical statement by the chef (for example, seasonal touches referring to the impermanence of life), and also a means of linking with nature. For example, the rough, asymmetrical, and "used-looking" look of the tableware, in contrast to say the impeccable and ornate perfection of the Chinese equivalent, references wabi-sabi and is meant to both complement the seasonal and natural feel of the ingredients, and make you think about the bittersweet nature of ephemeral life. There might even be cultural references. In many cases you're supposed to get out still feeling slightly hungry. Each dish evokes a different feeling and the succession of feelings and the way in which they are executed are what a meal like Kikunoi is about. (dear Japanese readers please correct me) It's like "no" theatre (not kabuki!): a highly formalized, stylized art form where the audience is expected to be familiar with everything already and is appreciating only the "how" not the "what" of the play. A no performance uses archaic language modern Japanese audiences don't even understand, but all the attendees know the words already. It would feel tremendously boring to an outsider (guilty!), with not much visually happening, whilst your Japanese host gets excited about the masterly way in which bending the head a couple of degrees down has utterly changed the implied feeling of the actor. When I first travelled to Japan, I was frustrated by the lack of intensity present in, well, everything, from architecture to food (except fast food) and even fashion. My relatively frequent trips to Japan improved a lot after I took the time to read books to try and understand the local mindset, at least of Kamakura to Edo period Japan (when the warriors took over from the overly sophisticated aristocracy that ran the country from Kyoto in the Heian period). It is this refinement within the constraints of simplicity (with the tea ceremony the most extreme example) that makes Japanese arts so sophisticated. We sort of have it in the West too; Mozart is not impressive aurally in the way that, say, Rachmaninov or Liszt might be, but playing Mozart well (or something like Liszt's Pilgrimage Years) requires a lifetime of study and is appreciated for its subtlety and control and life experience more than the sheer block of sound and expressed ideas in the content.

nosuchthing 11y ago
Reminds me of how different people appreciate and create distinctions between "high art", pop art, lowbrow art, and outsider art. Reading Yelp reviews makes me cringe at all the people who demand attentive service from restaurant staff, and all the attention to venue and atmosphere. Personally, when I go to a restaurant, generally I go to find some tasty food, atmosphere is always besides the point. Obviously some people factor in obscure details of food venue experiences to their reviews and they care about those things. As in music, some people love obscure subgenres of repetitive techno or metal, or specific renditions of classical songs played at a certain venue during a specific point in time by a regional musician, played at a specific pacing. Reviews are always someone else's opinion, which is great if the reviewer can articulate the goods and bads of their personal experience for others to relate to. What Happens When Second Graders Are Treated to a Seven-Course, $220 Tasting Meal http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/12/magazine/fine-dining-for-second-graders.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/12/magazine/fine-dining-for-s...
- crdb 11y ago
  Most arts require, to an extent, some prior knowledge. It is not so much that there are distinctions but that previous study and understanding is required to make the most of any art (including "pop" or "lowbrow"). A guest in my house this week is a big fan of very simple techno. I'm obsessively listening to and playing through Franck's Prelude, Chorale and Fugue after hearing Stephen Hough play parts of it at a masterclass a month ago which gave me a new understanding of and hunger for the piece. I do so with headphones because I know the sound bothers my guest. What little techno I have heard from his computer bothers ME a little because of the absolute paucity of content (I say this as someone who brought a Daft Punk track to an analysis class as a joke which turned into a 1h30 discussion on the only three elements we were able to isolate). My taste has evolved from over 25 years of investing in understanding (classical) music, probably well over the 10,000 hours mark. He hasn't invested the hours (decades) so he doesn't appreciate the art, much or at all. And that's fine - he appreciates other things in life, in which he has invested time, and in which I understand very little. The content of the Franck is complex and high dimensional (if that makes sense) and requires that previous body of knowledge and experience to appreciate; in fact, as someone who has never played on an organ, I am probably lacking a fair amount of experience to make the most of Franck. With that body of knowledge, you are able to judge and appreciate the piece according to objective standards. Without, you get the second graders and the tasting meal (and they did like the wagyu!). Untrained listeners will react to some of the harmonies. Take the famous hand jump chords [1]. A "man in the street" might appreciate the familiar chord progression. A pianist will react immediately to the genius of that hand jump that forces you to isolate the "melody" (and perhaps shaping the arpeggiated chord that ends up "naturally" leading to it) due to the physics of getting to that last note. I took a friend to that masterclass and he was as bored as I was fascinated. From A Mathematician's Apology: "Mr. J. M. Lomas put this point more picturesquely when we were passing the Nelson column in Trafalgar Square. If I had a statue on a column in London, would I prefer the column to be so high that the statue was invisible, or low enough for the features to be recognizable? I would choose the first alternative, Dr. Snow, presumably, the second." [2] That being said I think there is value in "man on the street" reviews. As such a man in the case of many fields, I would like to know how others reacted as a proxy for my own reaction. There is a place for Yelp, and for Michelin. One is wealthier for reading both. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dq67nsDLucI&t=5m32s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dq67nsDLucI&t=5m32s [2] http://www.amazon.com/Mathematicians-Apology-Canto-Classics/dp/110760463X/ http://www.amazon.com/Mathematicians-Apology-Canto-Classics/...

by crdb 11y ago

nosuchthing 11y ago

Reminds me of how different people appreciate and create distinctions between "high art", pop art, lowbrow art, and outsider art. Reading Yelp reviews makes me cringe at all the people who demand attentive service from restaurant staff, and all the attention to venue and atmosphere. Personally, when I go to a restaurant, generally I go to find some tasty food, atmosphere is always besides the point. Obviously some people factor in obscure details of food venue experiences to their reviews and they care about those things. As in music, some people love obscure subgenres of repetitive techno or metal, or specific renditions of classical songs played at a certain venue during a specific point in time by a regional musician, played at a specific pacing. Reviews are always someone else's opinion, which is great if the reviewer can articulate the goods and bads of their personal experience for others to relate to. What Happens When Second Graders Are Treated to a Seven-Course, $220 Tasting Meal http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/12/magazine/fine-dining-for-second-graders.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/12/magazine/fine-dining-for-s...

crdb 11y ago
Most arts require, to an extent, some prior knowledge. It is not so much that there are distinctions but that previous study and understanding is required to make the most of any art (including "pop" or "lowbrow"). A guest in my house this week is a big fan of very simple techno. I'm obsessively listening to and playing through Franck's Prelude, Chorale and Fugue after hearing Stephen Hough play parts of it at a masterclass a month ago which gave me a new understanding of and hunger for the piece. I do so with headphones because I know the sound bothers my guest. What little techno I have heard from his computer bothers ME a little because of the absolute paucity of content (I say this as someone who brought a Daft Punk track to an analysis class as a joke which turned into a 1h30 discussion on the only three elements we were able to isolate). My taste has evolved from over 25 years of investing in understanding (classical) music, probably well over the 10,000 hours mark. He hasn't invested the hours (decades) so he doesn't appreciate the art, much or at all. And that's fine - he appreciates other things in life, in which he has invested time, and in which I understand very little. The content of the Franck is complex and high dimensional (if that makes sense) and requires that previous body of knowledge and experience to appreciate; in fact, as someone who has never played on an organ, I am probably lacking a fair amount of experience to make the most of Franck. With that body of knowledge, you are able to judge and appreciate the piece according to objective standards. Without, you get the second graders and the tasting meal (and they did like the wagyu!). Untrained listeners will react to some of the harmonies. Take the famous hand jump chords [1]. A "man in the street" might appreciate the familiar chord progression. A pianist will react immediately to the genius of that hand jump that forces you to isolate the "melody" (and perhaps shaping the arpeggiated chord that ends up "naturally" leading to it) due to the physics of getting to that last note. I took a friend to that masterclass and he was as bored as I was fascinated. From A Mathematician's Apology: "Mr. J. M. Lomas put this point more picturesquely when we were passing the Nelson column in Trafalgar Square. If I had a statue on a column in London, would I prefer the column to be so high that the statue was invisible, or low enough for the features to be recognizable? I would choose the first alternative, Dr. Snow, presumably, the second." [2] That being said I think there is value in "man on the street" reviews. As such a man in the case of many fields, I would like to know how others reacted as a proxy for my own reaction. There is a place for Yelp, and for Michelin. One is wealthier for reading both. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dq67nsDLucI&t=5m32s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dq67nsDLucI&t=5m32s [2] http://www.amazon.com/Mathematicians-Apology-Canto-Classics/dp/110760463X/ http://www.amazon.com/Mathematicians-Apology-Canto-Classics/...