I’ve injected a few comments and added some more suggestions at the end.
Eli plans to investigate mimesis in music within the context of questions I and IV. He posits two questions that he will track throughout the essay: “Does live music encourage mimetic exploration? What parts of a live music be evidence for can be considered mimetic art and what parts serve other functions?”[quotations from Eli’s abstract]. The paper will begin by inquiring into the nature of art-mimesis. The next move is to posit a series of postulations characterizing a species of mimesis unique to music.
The essay is divided into five movements.
I. Assertion that “mimesis is the reproduction of something or someone else” and that this process [or activity?] spawns a “micro-world.” [Can’t there be a micro and macro world in a given mimetic world? Why did you choose this terminology?]
II. Mimetic presentations [different from representations?] are simulacrums of the objects they depict—particularly with music.
III. “We use experiences from our lives to supplement the mimetic material that we are receiving” (e.g. “we appreciation love songs on a whole new level when we are in love.”)
IV. “When we experience mimetic art we appreciate the medium and the thing that the art represents. The medium of music is very powerful, the mimetic content may not be as strong as in a play or a book but people enjoy music much more easily then they enjoy the wordplay of literature or the brushstrokes of a painting.” [‘worldplay’ and ‘brushstrokes’ are very precise features relative to their medium. I think it’s more effective to juxtapose mediums on the same level.]
V. What mimetic content in a work, if any, has potential to inspire mimetic experiences? Eli suggests that art is mimetic and that “audiences coordinate imaginatively with the author” to appreciate this content.
VI. Inject further analysis extrapolated from personal experience with music.
Comments:
--Pick terms that you can narrowly define in order to avoid ambiguity. These notions were particularly ambiguous for me: ‘reproduction,’ signposts,’ ‘the thing that the art represents’ and ‘appreciating a medium.’
--In III you say that “love songs are perfect examples” and in IV that it is easier for people to enjoy music than other mediums.” These are really bold assumptions that may distract the reader from what you’re really trying to focus on.
--It seems like your essay is more focused on questions III and IV. It’s definitely worthwhile to start with an exposition of different theories to lay down a groundwork and arrive at a working definition of mimesis but since it doesn’t seem that you plan to develop your conception of mimesis, I think you should use question I in the capacity of supporting or providing a framework for your dialectical journey so you have more leverage to hone in on some of the specific points you bring up.
-- I think improvisation in music would be an interesting addition to V. Jazz saxophonist Wayne Shorter said that when he improvises he often pretends he’s an auxiliary or background character in a movie such as the guy chillin in the corner of a bar away from the main action. This seems to be an interesting unison of real-world experience and participation in mimesis. Jazz musicians look both too both features in music, such as chord changes and interpretive acts of the other musicians, and real-world experiences for inspiration. Actually this speaks to III and V, which seem to be close cousins anyway. Maybe consider combining them?
--II-VI don’t seem to have potential to develop II. I really like II and think it’d be interesting if you can address it throughout.
Cool. This topic really speaks to me as a musician and I think you’ve thought up some interesting perspectives to approach mimesis at work in music.
Good luck!
