 Kant distinguishes between agreeable and beautiful arts. While both involve pleasure, agreeable arts merely aim at arousing enjoyment, whereas beautiful arts involve cognition (Kant 1790: §44). The apparent ambiguity in Kant’s remarks on music runs so deep that he may seem to contradict himself even on the status of music as a beautiful art. He lists Tafelmusik (light music composed to be a background accompaniment to dining) alongside the art of telling amusing stories and jokes as an example of agreeable art, and adds that this kind of music is supposed to encourage conversation “without anyone paying the least attention to its composition” (Kant 1790: §44). In the “Remark” that concludes the first section of the Critique, Kant once more lists music alongside the joke as an agreeable art. However, elsewhere in the same work Kant clearly counts music a beautiful art, ranking it alongside poetry and painting (§44, 191). More importantly, Kant discusses music in §51, where he introduces his division of the beautiful arts. Samantha Matherne (2014: 135–138) has argued that Kant’s apparent hesitation is actually grounded in a different attitude we may take to music. If we attend to the bodily effect of the piece, music will be merely agreeable, whereas a focus on the formal structure of the work will make possible a judgment of taste, and thus music may be found beautiful.