Marje posted:
I'm with Scrump on this one: I might be reduced to tears, but for all the wrong reasons. I'd call it more of a "Pass the Sick Bucket" thread.

Are we looking at a UK/US split here? My gut feeling is that USians have much more of a taste for sentimentality than the Brits do.

Don't get me wrong, I'm often moved to tears by music and songs, but not the kind of schmalz that's laid on with a trowel and then has honey poured over it and a cherry stuck on the top.

I'd be interested to know whether others think it's more to do with national cultural preferences or simply individual taste and temperament.

It probably has plenty to do with cultural differences. Over here, people seem to be moved by some ridiculous shit (see the movie "Love Story" for an example--Harlan Ellison says that he was called a sicko for laughing at the sheer over-the-topness of the final death scene).

I think that whether a song is moving tends to depend on the performance. You can sing a sad song ironically, or you can sing a humorous song sadly, and if you're successful, you'll bring something to the table (or stage, if you prefer) that's quite different from what was expected or intended.

For me, I don't respond well to feeling like I'm being manipulated, but if the song looks and feels sincere (and this is mainly in the performance), it's moving. I can feel the same thing when I'm performing something, too--Martin Carthy said something once about a performance being an act of creation, where the song is coming into being between you and the audience, and I think that moment of birth, summoning, or awakening (however you prefer to think about it) is where the authenticity of the song and its ability to move becomes relevant. Before that, it's just a lifeless thing on a piece of paper.