Jim Tobin wrote:
>It may be that informed, open-ended critical discussion of music is
>as close as we can get to "objectivity." If "truly objective" requires
>scientific standards of measurement beyond any dispute, then this is
>neither available or appropriate for assessing music. (And as the history
>of science shows there are a lot of disputed measurements there too.)
>But if you can show that many listeners have found a piece profoundly
>moving, say, then you do have an objective measure of sorts--there is
>this music and there are these reactions to it--though the "measure"
>is one that implies listener-music interaction.
I suppose there will soon be an "objective" measure of the state of being
profoundly moved, with all the research being done into scanning the
innermost reaches of the brain. Until then, I know of but two forms of
art (or entertainment, or what you will) whose effectiveness in "moving"
their audience may be evaluated by some externally observable means.
One is humor and the other is erotica.