Is Inspiration Needed to Compose?

Lestofante wrote:

I am not a composer but... can it be that imagination feeds fantasy?

... eh, I was spinning (in circles) right on this ...

CromaDiBrera wrote:

In my opinion, imagination is the ability to prefigure the result of an association of ideas. Example: in a certain phrase, choosing an instrumentation never before practiced, or thinking of an unusual harmonic succession, can be choices suggested by fantasy; but "having the effect in mind" (without having had experience of it, that is) is a matter of imagination. After all, the word itself says so: to imagine, that is, to render through images.

I think a person can have more fantasy than imagination, or vice versa.

...so influenced by fantasy, no?

AbateFaria wrote:

...so influenced by fantasy, right?

So no, in my opinion; I was precisely arguing that they are two different faculties. Let me give another example: I think an orchestra conductor needs imagination, because they must imagine the result to be pursued, rather than fantasy. Another one, non-musical: two people (Fantasy and Imagination) go to a paint shop to color a room; Fantasy says: "let's make it purple, with pea-green wainscoting";

and Imagination responds: "that sucks!".

And Fantasy: "how do you know, maybe it's beautiful, right?";

and Imagination: "It isn't, because I imagine it so";

Fantasy: "Fine, let's hear what you propose then...".

"Dunno...!".

"Then let's make the ceiling purple...! With black walls and a poster of Gino Paoli...!".

And imagination responds: "Black takes away the light, we would always have to keep the lights on, can you imagine...?"

"No" ...

And so on...

In my opinion, imagination and fantasy are two different things.

Imagination is that capacity that allows you to see what fantasy has produced, thus foreseeing an idea... inspiration, on the other hand, determines the quality of the idea... sometimes it is said, this work is very inspired.

CromaDiBrera wrote:

i think an orchestra conductor needs imagination, because they must imagine the result to be pursued, rather than fantasy.

...but ideas are not all the same, some form of fantasy will have to be used too, right?

Natan wrote:

... sometimes it is said, this work is very inspired.

A very difficult concept to "rationalize", perhaps it is equivalent to saying: "not forced but arrived as if it had always existed"?

in my experience I agree with Geppino and to summarize I can quote what my composition teacher used to say, who loved to express himself with short and pithy phrases:

The craft is at the service of inspiration and inspiration nobleizes the craft ... which seems to me is exactly what Geppino is saying.

We have seen in old workshops that there were people who had beautiful initial ideas (theme) but then got lost in the developments, in the instrumental/choral texture etc. in plain words they lacked the craft, which ultimately comes from study and practice.

AbateFaria wrote:

A very difficult concept to "rationalize," perhaps it is equivalent to saying: "not sought out by force but arrived as if it had always existed"?

... they say that about Mozart's music

AbateFaria wrote:

...but ideas are not all the same, some form of fantasy must use it too, right?

Fantasy is useful to all musicians, not just conductors! Without fantasy, one doesn't go very far...

As for the difference between imagination and fantasy, I believe that in certain cases the two things coincide greatly, obviously if the concept of imagination is extended and not considered only as "the ability to imagine a result."

Look at this rehearsal by Carlos Kleiber: is this a matter of imagination? of fantasy? of both? Bah... a subtle difference

Open content (youtube)

...just as I imagined Carlos, I think like you

...you are fantastic

CromaDiBrera wrote:

i invite you to try at all costs

... now that I have heard some works, maybe I will try

I believe I have already written (and, anyway, it seemed evident to me from the somewhat wacky examples I proposed) that fantasy and imagination are complementary to one another: their combination determines what is called creativity. A person who is fanciful but incapable of imagining the result of their own "fantasies" (that is, without what I define as imagination) cannot produce anything because they lack an essential tool for self-criticism, namely the faculty to select the best among one's ideas while setting aside those that are not very productive. Conversely, a person who knows how to imagine results without having the gift of fantasy remains a stranger to what we call creativity.

Personally, I have known musicians of both kinds: a good sound technician, for example, is rich in imagination but not in fantasy: his skill lies precisely in making the fantasies of others tangible (to the ears, that is). There are composers, however (even here on the forum, we all know them... I won't name names for discretion), who concentrate on fantasy, feeling the realization of their own writings, instead, as something intimately foreign: their satisfaction is realized through creation "in itself."

For example, I like to compose, but I have more imagination than fantasy. So much so that the mere fact of having one sound library instead of another immediately leads me to write other notes, or for other instruments, that is, to adapt myself to the means at my disposal to "realize" my ideas. If I were on a proverbial desert island, I would never write a string quartet, but a piece for blown shells and struck logs... I don't know if I am making myself clear. On the other hand, there are those who are primarily interested in writing, creating, without caring about the possibilities of concretely realizing ideas, or at least separating the two moments (perhaps rightly so, after all...): well, to this second species, I say that those who have more fantasy than imagination belong.

The issue has profound practical, real implications, which I will not delve into now to avoid being prolix; but there have been many discussions, in this and other forums, traceable to the "mental" differences to which I have just referred.

P.S. Sorry, I wanted to change something on the fly to make everything clearer, but "I don't have permission". Oh well...

for me inspiration is nothing more than a simple stimulus, a basic idea that must then be concretely realized and developed, a seed that must become a tree

So 1% is inspiration, the 99% lies halfway between instinct and rationality, and it is hard and painful work.

Without inspiration, one goes nowhere; those who have to support a family have tried to convince us that science is within the 4 walls of a... conservatory (and the name itself says it all). .. are we sure?

The results are many depressed people who feel inadequate... and frustrated.

Music is freedom... not 4 walls

Tap wrote:

Music is freedom...

... I would like to hear some of your pieces, there is a great section that can't wait to host one of your topics

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/forum/111-questo-lho-scritto-io/

Frank wrote:

... I would like to hear some of your pieces, there is a great section that can't wait to host one of your topics

I am not looking for validation

Tap wrote:

I am not looking for confirmation

...actually, I was interested in breathing a bit of "your" freedom. Confirmation is given at school, not in a forum