Stop and prepare : Cage

[Peter]

I agree in many aspects with you but in this point.

Sorry in advance because perhaps this post may be perceived as not documented but it tries to describe my personal approach and perception (and I've been awaken for 16 hours, so don't expect much from me

I'm one of the posters who have said that I don't participate in this discussion. In my case this is not the only topic in which I act as a simple reader of others' opinions; there are other discussions in which I don't participate because I feel I would not add much or because I'm at work and I can read but it's better not to spend much time writing.

On this particular discussion, certainly there's some composers whose music I haven't listened and some artistic movements of which I don't have a deep knowledge, but the problem is that usually when one show dislike regarding some modern-avant-garde-contemporary-etc... music there is a reference to that "ideological" element beyond the strictly "aesthetical" element. And if we are talking about music, if you don't like what you listen, that's it, at least in the particular moment you are listening to that music.

I move in what we could qualify a peculiar balance point betweent the opposite views portayed by you and Peter. I am very curious and I am exploring different styles, movements, composers... but that does not exclude a certain level of irony in some cases. Perhaps I could summarize it saying that many times I would agree with Peter notwithstanding the fact that I'm expanding my interests.

Now it will seem that I'm not english-fluent: There is music I don't "like", sounds "bad" or that leaves me "cold", indifferent or confused beacuse I don't understand and therefore don't see the point, but there is music that... it's not that I don't "like", but does not sound "particularly friendly" to me, (hope you understand what I mean) that make me feel curious and keep exploring, relistening, etc... And then I expect for the moment when I'll get the point, I'll be in the mood or I'll discover some piece I like and it has happened. And it happens when I'm alone, because if my girlfriend is at home, depending on the piece, it's a question of minutes or even seconds to hear that lovely voice saying "could you change this music PLEEEEEEEEASE"

Despite the abovementioned, in strict confidence, some friends have laughed very loud listening to my descriptions of some music (irony, sarcasm, funny, call it as you want). Perhaps now, having read this, if some day I make some more or less ironic remark about a piece/composer you'll put my words in context, but I remember when Sorrano replied to me that Ligeti's Lux Aeterna was one of his preferred pieces when I said before "I also ran like hell from Gyorgy Ligeti's Requiem for soprano, mezzosoprano, 2 choirs and orchestra. When I listen to music like that my first question is: Why?".

Now I love his musica ricercata, some other piano pieces, among others... but that does not exclude that I still may make some comments about some music or composer that, if you don't know me a little bit and possibily if you're not in front of me with a pint of beer seeing me smile, would definitely upset some.

My main ingredients are curiosity, patience, research, time, interest... and humor.

Thank you for that refreshing and balanced post atserriotserri. Contrary to what Philip may think I actually have and still am taking an interest in new music/art and have learnt much from these discussions. Where I differ with Philip is in our definition of what constitutes art and music or even good or bad art/music.

[atserriotserri]

I think that after such nice and kind remarks from Peter I must point out something that I forgot: Express my opinion to the origin of this thread: The Stop, repare, prepare performance.

Perhaps I'm wrong but I have the impression that this interesting thread comes from a conceptual problem (and perhaps I'm getting into one right now ). Peter, I guess, expresses an opinion based perhaps not only but mostly on the "musical" element, when Philip takes into consideration the whole significance of the performance.

I think that the strictly musical element in that performance is minor. Just like one would not review a thriller film or a comedy for its soundtrack (that is, not a musical film, but one that has opening, closing and incidental music accompanying some scenes) or to valorate if one is leasing an office on a buildign based upon the music played in the elevator (irony ), one cannot make an statement over an artistic manifestation which includes music taking into account only on the music.

Even more in this case, where the unorthodox way of playing the 4th movement of the 9th symphony (from inside the piano, with a couple of octaves unplayable and moving inside a gallery), in my humble point of view evidences that the use of such music is based upon its cultural significance as a symbol, but no one (or a minimal fraction of the attendance) will go there to listen how these gentleman and lady play a piano transcription of the 4th movement of the 9th symphony.

Therefore, obviously the opinion will be negative. One needs to deepen into the purpose of the performance, the objective of these artist to have a full picture... but even then, being positive I think that the artists have spent long time defining what they want to express, his message... and I like more the concept than the performance itself (something I feel frequently with this performances the idea is enticing but I seem to don't understand/misunderstand some or many "symbols", "metaphores" or the significance of certain actions).

Take a look at youtube (for instance http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vw5DkkBXww4 ) and judge.

[Quijote]

Well, quite so. Did I ever say otherwise?

[Quijote]

Thank you for that refreshing and balanced post atserriotserri. Contrary to what Philip may think I actually have and still am taking an interest in new music/art and have learnt much from these discussions. Where I differ with Philip is in our definition of what constitutes art and music or even good or bad art/music.

Refreshing, possibly, but balanced? You mean not critical of your position, no? And why contrary to what I may think? I am delighted that you are taking such an interest in the (art) music of today. When may we expect your insights into the electroacoustic oeuvre of Denis Smalley? And when may we expect your fuller definition of the 'renaissance'?

[Peter]

Refreshing, possibly, but balanced? You mean not critical of your position, no? And why contrary to what I may think? I am delighted that you are taking such an interest in the (art) music of today. When may we expect your insights into the electroacoustic oeuvre of Denis Smalley? And when may we expect your fuller definition of the 'renaissance'?

No I didn't mean that - I was referring to Atserriotserri's opening and closing statements actually. With regard to renaissance I cannot say exactly - how could someone in the 10th century have answered such a question? I don't mean the pastiche that you imply as though there is no alternative. I don't think that tonality has to be regarded as dead though - why is it that popular music is so dominant, could it be that it still embraces tonality? And hasn't classical music always embraced popular music from the Troubadours to Bartok?

Regarding electroacoustic 'music' - it may be interesting and intellectually stimulating but it doesn't move me. I cannot feel the pain of Wintereisse, the joy of Schiller, the despair of Dido, the ecstasy of Liebestod, the love of Leonore in these sounds. Are they there? Am I missing them or should I be looking for something else and if so what?

Shouldn't art reflect life? I understand the problems because every aspect of human emotion has been covered in the past - love, joy, death, suffering etc... So what is electroacoustic trying to say? Has it given up trying to say these things and if so what is it saying?

[atserriotserri]

Well, quite so. Did I ever say otherwise?

Is this a reply to my first post on the general theme to put it in a way, or to the second post on the performance itself?

Sorry.

[Michael]

No and No (I was actually born less than half a mile from Dickens, but that's neither here nor there; in fact it's just over there).

Gad's Hill or what? Or do you mean to say you were born in or around 1812?

[Quijote]

Is this a reply to my first post on the general theme to put it in a way, or to the second post on the performance itself?

Sorry.

The "performance".

[Quijote]

No I didn't mean that - I was referring to Atserriotserri's opening and closing statements actually. With regard to renaissance I cannot say exactly - how could someone in the 10th century have answered such a question? I don't mean the pastiche that you imply as though there is no alternative. I don't think that tonality has to be regarded as dead though - why is it that popular music is so dominant, could it be that it still embraces tonality? And hasn't classical music always embraced popular music from the Troubadours to Bartok?

Tonality is certainly not dead, and I am not calling for its death.

Regarding electroacoustic 'music' - it may be interesting and intellectually stimulating but it doesn't move me. I cannot feel the pain of Wintereisse, the joy of Schiller, the despair of Dido, the ecstasy of Liebestod, the love of Leonore in these sounds. Are they there? Am I missing them or should I be looking for something else and if so what?

That it doesn't move you, ok. Do you feel 'pain' 'joy', 'despair', 'ecstasy' and 'love' in Pérotin and the masses of Palestrina, Victoria or Ockeghem (apart, that is, from their texts)?

Shouldn't art reflect life? I understand the problems because every aspect of human emotion has been covered in the past - love, joy, death, suffering etc... So what is electroacoustic trying to say? Has it given up trying to say these things and if so what is it saying?

I don't understand the question, to be honest. Should art 'directly' reflect life? Should art 'imitate' life? I need to reflect. I will try to give my view of what electroacoustic music is 'trying to say' later, after even more considerable reflection.

[Quijote]

I seem to be doing all the work, here. The nouns you mention above (pain, suffering, death blah blah blah), do they apply to Pérotin, Victoria, Ockeghem et al, and do / should they apply to other serious art music genres? If you know what any "music" is trying to "say", you will kindly publish your ideas for peer review.

[Peter]

I seem to be doing all the work, here. The nouns you mention above (pain, suffering, death blah blah blah), do they apply to Pérotin, Victoria, Ockeghem et al, and do / should they apply to other serious art music genres? If you know what any "music" is trying to "say", you will kindly publish your ideas for peer review.

I was waiting for your promised illuminations on electroacoustic music after all that is what we are discussing here not Pre-renaissance. Instead of lambasting me and anyone who doesn't appreciate this 'music' it would be far more constructive if you tried to explain it as well as what you consider the purpose of art.

[Quijote]

And I am waiting for you to clarify certain points before I proceed. As I said above, I seem to be doing all the work.

[Preston]

Philip, would you mind giving me the name of someone who is good at electroacoustic music or showing me a good example of electroacoustic music, preferably on You Tube? I want to hear what all this is about. Thanks.

[Peter]

And I am waiting for you to clarify certain points before I proceed. As I said above, I seem to be doing all the work.

That's because this is your topic - it has always been the main source of interest for you on this forum. I would echo Preston's comments and I think this would be a more positive approach to the topic - let's try and be more constructive.

[Quijote]

Philip, would you mind giving me the name of someone who is good at electroacoustic music or showing me a good example of electroacoustic music, preferably on You Tube? I want to hear what all this is about. Thanks.

A few names for you Preston, but I've no idea if they feature on You Tube. I doubt the composers would be happy for their music to be heard via that medium, as ideally it should be heard in the correct performing context : suitable hall with the right number and placement of speakers for the 'spatialization' of the sounds. Their works do of course feature on CDs, and I suppose they give an approximation of the intended effect. Anyway, the names :

a) Denis Smalley (maybe start with an early work, 'Pentes', or 'Wind Chimes');
b) Jonathan Harvey (try 'Mortuos Plango, Vivos Voco');
c) Alejandro Vinao (try 'Chant d'Ailleurs', or 'Go').

Those are three of the 'big names'. Let us know what you think.