an artist's intentions

Last night, I was reading the liner notes to a CD of Bach's "Art of
Fugue;" it's fascinating that it was written for no specific
instrument...Bach left it wide open to many interpretations. So, what to
make of that decision, except that the idea of the composition, the
essential meaning, is more important than the means to get that message
across. I agree with that idea of art (but it's fine with me that others
may not), because I like the idea of the endless variety of music that
could arise from thinking that way. Bach, of course, was the Maestro,
big time, of Western harmonic concepts, spinning line after line of
beautiful variations on his themes...they have great technique, real
emotional/spiritual depth, and flawless compositional logic...Papa Bach,
indeed. He's one for the ages.
I don't think this debate will ever be resolved, but it is
interesting to see people's views on it. I've said this before, but here
it is now: I really don't feel, on the deepest levels, that my music
"belongs" to me...it's some sort of gift from somewhere much bigger than
me, and I'm just kind of along for the ride. Far from discouraging
another musician from playing a tune of mine in another fashion, I would
be delighted if someone actually liked my music enough to want to play
it. The less restrictions placed on art, the better...imagination is a
very powerful force in the Universe, and has changed the face of the
world more than once. I really enjoy hearing folks coming up with their
own take on an idea...perhaps one person will bring out something
someone else missed....I would (and do) encourage all musicians ( all
artists) to put their own stamp on whatever they're doing...Hstick