[Thor Joachim Haga]

Some excellent posts by Gerate and Nick there. There really isn’t anything right or wrong about which criteria one uses (all the ones mentioned so far seem fine to me), but there’s always the strive to find some sort of broad, semi-objective criteria that can function as umbrella categories for more specific sub criteria. Re-reading that old FSM thread, I see a made a post a few months later, in June 2001, where I tried to use criteria I had picked up from a media criticism course I was attending, to film music. I DO still like these main criteria as overarching categories, although there’s much to be discussed and nuanced within them. Here’s what I said at the time:

————-

Since I’ve just completed a course in media criticism here at the university, I thought I’d resurrect this thread – to see if anyone is interested in further discussion.

The reason is simply that I have several new criteria to add.

The four criteria that I mentioned in the initial post have really to do with the SUBJECTIVE interpretation of the product; with the quality we attach to a product out of a simple identification with it. I’m still 100% behind that one and I think they cover a lot of ground.

However, one may also forward several socalled OBJECTIVE criteria; criteria that reviewers (should ideally) use when they’re talking about a certain film or film score to assess a legit dichotomy between ‘good’ and ‘bad’.

If one is going to use the same “type” or system of criteria that is applied to literary texts, one can separate between the following:

1) A MORAL/POLITICAL CRITERION

This has to do with the ‘attitude’ in the text; how ‘important’ it is in a political or ethical context. I find it hard to relate this to film music, though (although easily to film, of course).

2) A COGNITIVE CRITERION

This has to do with the ‘depth’ of the text – what the text has to offer intellectually. This one is basically the same as my no. 4) in the first post.

3) A GENETIC CRITERION

This is a criterion first and foremost attached to the text’s ORIGINALITY – whether in relation to other historical texts/scores or to the artist’s own output. Innovation.

4) AN AESTHETIC CRITERION

This is perhaps the most relevant criterion in a (film) music context. It has to do with the actual artistic expression.

It can be subdivided into three:

a) Complexity

The text/score has to offer more than one level of perception. Several text/score levels, several reader/listener levels, several interpretative levels etc.

b) Integrity

The score has to be ‘tied together’ in one way or other. Coherence. Unity (see Dan Hobgood’s recent FSDaily, although I have several issues with his point-of-departure). The MOTIVATION for certain approaches etc.

c) Intensity

There has to be a “hook” in the text/score, something that can emotionally engage the listener to continue listening. Vivacity. How “new” can a well-known phenomenon be described to attract interest? Attached to this is the theory of “audience expectations”.