The music is inseparable from the territory which it builds, and we say colloquially that "we identify" with this or that song. This territory, threatened constantly, is maintained through a small repetition ensures that at the time of its effectuation, territorial consistency. There is no existence without territory, and by the way, the Territory is to sketch and draw the how of it.
There are certain musical expressiveness deploy our existence beyond the limits we thought impassable beyond vehiculantes moralizing and production of capitalistic subjectivity. Enter then, in connection, incredible virtual universes, the whole cosmos in our body, to discuss a curious silence sidereal, a cosmic musical, or a specialty hiperdilatada.
Conversely, not opposite-music becomes inspiration but not an ally of philosophy. Well, what great philosopher has made his philosophy, music? What great philosopher did not include the music inside, but appropriate, their concepts? The musicality of the philosopher is, by far, the virtue of the deployment of feeling. Those who have not included la música, o que no se han incluido con ella, en fin, sabemos que han hecho de todo menos filosofía.
De cualquier manera, hay un rechazo hacia la música que no esté acompañada por la voz. Acaso Ligeti, Stockhausen y Boulez hayan sido capaces de liberar la voz de un conjunto de discursos “significadores” que la aprisionaban. Se da, decimos, una incapacidad de ver territorios en la música, y bien es cierto que aquélla nos invade y solemos dedicarnos a escuchar otras Disposiciones que “nos digan algo”. Puede que hayamos perdido el oído, o quedado sordos. Aun así, sacaremos algo positivo de todo esto: En un momento de saturación vocal, dentro de aquello called music scene, there is always an explosion and implosion of subjectivity that opens, ipso facto, towards promoting creation singularities, no denying the occasional pre capitalistically mold (so as not to fall into that abyss of undifferentiated). Such is the case of groups or factions as Sigur Rós, Explosions in the Sky, Mono, etc..
snob is frankly stupid and described as good or bad, or openly refuse to accept a music based on the number of listeners and the "class" of them. Only say: "the music was not for us but us." When we talk music, we say two elements absolutely necessary for itself to be meaningful and heartfelt: The existential territory and the Universes of Reference. Take an example of the latter. Gender (but not too much we satisfy this word] of post-rock enabled a creative edge, which led (as might have resulted in "something else") to space-rock or vice versa. And post-rock or space- also come from a rock edge (kingdom, family) who provided their own generation. Of course, the edge is not, by itself, guarantee of any building, since it has to be in contact with streams, which in turn contact in and existential territories, etc.
ask why can not we bring the philosophy of music (in case you have done) but what can bring music to philosophy. We say: Affects, emotions, and more affection. Modulations and variations in feeling, in the body, new provisions from which they build and create. It is clear that not everything that is built is input, positive or liberating. But this venture is an element with which we walk, knowing and working. Otherwise, we fall into complacency by security issue, or an apathetic comfort that is difficult once give up time to start playing, and in parallel, to listen.
