On September 10, 2001 most Americans went to bed. It was a Monday night near the start of the school year. Only a terrorist organization and 19 men who had planned to hijack four different planes the next day had any idea the momentous event that was about to occur.
For weeks, the news throughout the USA was dominated by the events of Tuesday September 11. During that time, Barber's Adagio for strings was routinely played at Concerts as a memorial to the dead. No matter what the occasion, the national anthem was performed at the start of almost every event.
A year later, as a means of commemorating the dead, the New York Philharmonic premiered a composition they had commissioned from John Adams. The title of this work: On the Transmigration of Souls. It had such an impact that it was awarded a Pulitzer prize.
What is so ironic about Adams choice by the Philharmonic to be the composer to write the work, is that his reputation had not completely recovered from the public ill will towards his Opera The Death of Klinghoffer (in fact, as mentioned earlier, Adams was in London at the time of the terror attacks recording The Death of Klinghoffer for the BBC. The project was suspended i memoriam for the dead, but eventually it was finished and the movie version of the opera was aired.)
This work employs a great deal of modernistic techniques, ranging from quarter tones, to audio recordings. A chorus is employed as well. Despite this apparent conglomeration of disparate parts, the work has a powerful effect. It aims to tell a story. It is the story of a country that prepared for a normal day, only to be stunned by news that terrorists would fly planes into three different buildings, killing 3,000, and causing billions of dollars in damage.
This work attempts through these modernistic techniques to recreate the horror and despair that occurred in the cities of New York and Washington D.C. Instead of using experimental techniques as a means of creating sounds and timbres, it uses these techniques to convey emotions.
This is what makes Adams such an important figure in American music. This story is not a story of just the USA. It is a story that involves every nation of the world, since nationalities of many countries of the globe were lost that day. It is a story that tells of an attack on the freedoms that people emigrated to this hemisphere to enjoy. Not only does the US consist of immigrants who came to find political asylum from regimes that frowned upon them, but also all of the other countries that are on both American continents. To further emphasize the Americaness of this work, it happened in a city (New York) which for generations had symbolized among immigrants as their opportunity to live a new dream: the American dream.
In fact, this work goes beyond just being American to Universal in nature. It tells the story of the struggles of all the peoples of the earth, since again, countless ethnicities were represented among the dead that day.
In class the last two days, we have discussed a great deal about the New York school of composers, in particular, John Cage. One must ask why is it that individuals as ingenious as Cage and Morton Feldman were considered minor composers (some would not consider Cage a musician at all) whereas Adams, who clearly utilized electronic multimedia in his compositions and other modernistic techniques pioneered by other composers mentioned in class, yet has remained immensely popular?
In my last Blog post, I mentioned that Cage was a man who exemplified postmodern music because of the methodology he employed. Yet while his methodology does exemplify postmodern thought, his problem was being unable to relate his philosophy in such a way that the audiences could understand and appreciate his methodology.
Adams writes music that utilizes these techniques but that does so in such a way as to connect with the audience. Cage, Feldman, and Parch were very much of the innovator vein, but they were so caught up with the innovation aspect of their music , that they neglected the fact that their innovations needed to be organized in such a way as to make it intelligible for the audience. The obvious lack of popularity of their music among concert goers attests to this fallacious thought tendency on their part.
Let me be clear on this point: while I do criticize these composers for their lack of interest in the audience and making music accessible to the general public, I do wish to commend them on their efforts. Much of their work is highly noteworthy, without which a composer such as Adams would not have been able to write music that he did. Yet, at the same time, it is because of Adams desire to relate to the audience, and not only audiences in this country, but also throughout this hemisphere, that makes his music both today and for the future, American to the core, and why Parch, Cage, and Feldman will be remembered as innovators to the core.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Ok, I'll do it it too: My Ipod.
I know, I know! I’m really behind on blog posts. So this week, I decided to ease into writing by talking about last week’s topic: the ipod. I figured it’s a straight forward place to start, and it’s relatively easy to write about. Hopefully, I’ll be caught up by the end of the week (or is that just wishful thinking?).
An ipod can be one of the most telling devices you can carry. For one, it’s a very private item. Can you remember that last time you loaned your ipod to a friend? Me neither. Instead, we share individual CDs and pieces with our friends. And the music we share tends to be the more respectable elements of our collection, pieces we think people will enjoy but will also make them think “My friend has great taste”. We don’t share the catchy albeit sometimes embarrassing tunes that we use to get psyched up for the day or belt in the shower. Even writing this I’m tempted to forgo what I really listen to and just give you the most obscure and challenging artists I can think of. But you can see my facebook page for that.
When I get home at the end of the day. I don’t want to listen to art music. I feel like I’ve been surrounded by it al day. Even if I haven’t been listening to it, I’ve been talking about it, analyzing it, practicing it, worrying about it. Blah! Enough! I am a pop listener. I am a pop listener who hates the radio, who hates mtv. Maybe hate is too strong a word. What ever word I choose, the point is these venues don’t appeal to me. I love me some NPR, but I won’t touch that radio during Sunday Baroque. I’ll pass on the three hours of Quantz flute duets.
I’m going to share four websites that changed the way I look for and listen to popular music. More avant garde (is that the term I’m looking for?) popular music is hard to find, and it seems that there is a certain air of pretention when it comes to more obscure but ground breaking bands. I think many people would like to find edgier music that aren’t part of the same top 40 radio rotation, but just don’t know where to look. The sheer amount of music out there can be overwhelming
1. metacritic.com- a music review aggregator extraordinaire. It compiles nearly every music review released about an album, and based on these reviews give an album some sort of score from 0-100. Sorry, no art music here unless you count Brian Eno’s new album with David Byrne-received a 75.
2. pitchforkmedia- This was my first exposure to pop music blogs. I don’t always agree with the critics, but it’s one of the more accessible sites I’ve come across. It has reviews, interviews, tour dates, and video. It’s very easy to navigate.
3. The hype machine at hypem.com: it streams many new releases and remixes of new releases, but I find this blog especially helpful because it indicates which artists currently have the most blog posts and which blogs are the most widely read at that moment. This is great for newly emerging artists who are starting to gain momentum and “hype”.
4. Largeheartedboy.com- I don’t really care for this blog simply because it’s so disorganized. Music reviews are interspersed with random book reviews and just a long list of random. . .stuff. I don’t even know what to call it. However, I enjoy it for a section called This Week’s Interesting releases. You’ll find 10-40 albums that you won’t find in almost any other source. On the left side of the screen, the author has new artists added to his personal ipod.
My music. Or at least the music I play over and over. I put artists in bold that I really think you should take a listen to if you’ve never heard of them. I’m assuming you’ve listened to the classical ones, so I won’t highlight any of them.
Andrew Jackson Jihad, antony and the johnsons, animal collective, Stravinsky, artie shaw, battles, the beatles, Beirut, bob dylan, brahms, caetano veloso, deerhoof, the dodos, elliot smith, elgar, girl talk, joanna newsom: van dyke parks did the orchestration on the album Ys, and it’s worth a listen; john adams, bach, k’naan, laura veirs, lauryn hill, man man, the mountain goats; neutral milk hotel; the new pornographers; panda bear; the tallest man on earth; jose gonzales; tv on the radio; mahler; ooioo; page france, the national; jenny lewis (but not rilo kiley, I don’t know why I don’t like that band); Beethoven, Moazrt, okkervil river; justice; maria taylor, sufjan stevens (he’s an interlochen alum) of montreal; islands; and Andrew bird.
YouTube is a wonderful innovation for musicians. It allows us to explore innumerable new worlds. And for free? That’s ridiculous. So be curious, and listen to everything you can get your hands on. I think your life will be richer for it.
An ipod can be one of the most telling devices you can carry. For one, it’s a very private item. Can you remember that last time you loaned your ipod to a friend? Me neither. Instead, we share individual CDs and pieces with our friends. And the music we share tends to be the more respectable elements of our collection, pieces we think people will enjoy but will also make them think “My friend has great taste”. We don’t share the catchy albeit sometimes embarrassing tunes that we use to get psyched up for the day or belt in the shower. Even writing this I’m tempted to forgo what I really listen to and just give you the most obscure and challenging artists I can think of. But you can see my facebook page for that.
When I get home at the end of the day. I don’t want to listen to art music. I feel like I’ve been surrounded by it al day. Even if I haven’t been listening to it, I’ve been talking about it, analyzing it, practicing it, worrying about it. Blah! Enough! I am a pop listener. I am a pop listener who hates the radio, who hates mtv. Maybe hate is too strong a word. What ever word I choose, the point is these venues don’t appeal to me. I love me some NPR, but I won’t touch that radio during Sunday Baroque. I’ll pass on the three hours of Quantz flute duets.
I’m going to share four websites that changed the way I look for and listen to popular music. More avant garde (is that the term I’m looking for?) popular music is hard to find, and it seems that there is a certain air of pretention when it comes to more obscure but ground breaking bands. I think many people would like to find edgier music that aren’t part of the same top 40 radio rotation, but just don’t know where to look. The sheer amount of music out there can be overwhelming
1. metacritic.com- a music review aggregator extraordinaire. It compiles nearly every music review released about an album, and based on these reviews give an album some sort of score from 0-100. Sorry, no art music here unless you count Brian Eno’s new album with David Byrne-received a 75.
2. pitchforkmedia- This was my first exposure to pop music blogs. I don’t always agree with the critics, but it’s one of the more accessible sites I’ve come across. It has reviews, interviews, tour dates, and video. It’s very easy to navigate.
3. The hype machine at hypem.com: it streams many new releases and remixes of new releases, but I find this blog especially helpful because it indicates which artists currently have the most blog posts and which blogs are the most widely read at that moment. This is great for newly emerging artists who are starting to gain momentum and “hype”.
4. Largeheartedboy.com- I don’t really care for this blog simply because it’s so disorganized. Music reviews are interspersed with random book reviews and just a long list of random. . .stuff. I don’t even know what to call it. However, I enjoy it for a section called This Week’s Interesting releases. You’ll find 10-40 albums that you won’t find in almost any other source. On the left side of the screen, the author has new artists added to his personal ipod.
My music. Or at least the music I play over and over. I put artists in bold that I really think you should take a listen to if you’ve never heard of them. I’m assuming you’ve listened to the classical ones, so I won’t highlight any of them.
Andrew Jackson Jihad, antony and the johnsons, animal collective, Stravinsky, artie shaw, battles, the beatles, Beirut, bob dylan, brahms, caetano veloso, deerhoof, the dodos, elliot smith, elgar, girl talk, joanna newsom: van dyke parks did the orchestration on the album Ys, and it’s worth a listen; john adams, bach, k’naan, laura veirs, lauryn hill, man man, the mountain goats; neutral milk hotel; the new pornographers; panda bear; the tallest man on earth; jose gonzales; tv on the radio; mahler; ooioo; page france, the national; jenny lewis (but not rilo kiley, I don’t know why I don’t like that band); Beethoven, Moazrt, okkervil river; justice; maria taylor, sufjan stevens (he’s an interlochen alum) of montreal; islands; and Andrew bird.
YouTube is a wonderful innovation for musicians. It allows us to explore innumerable new worlds. And for free? That’s ridiculous. So be curious, and listen to everything you can get your hands on. I think your life will be richer for it.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Some Thoughts on Cage
I will admit that during the course of my education that I have not done a whole lot of study about the music of Cage, and even now, I wonder if studying the music of Cage is as effective an endeavor as studying his philosophy. All of the music that he wrote points back towards his entire philosophy of Zen.
Throughout his life, as Brad pointed out, Cage asked questions which, even when answered, led to other questions. This in itself should be a tip off that the music he writes will (and is) indicative of a man who is searching for answers, loaded with questions about everything.
The Coca Cola bottle and the street noise observations made by Cage really caused me to think about how I view music and what I think it is. I forget who made the point yesterday, but in reality, music is something that is defined by its age. Our age is one of postmodernism, one which combines the sublime with the ridiculous to make a statement, or combines different ideas that, while they might be profound independent of each other, create a ludicrous result. Or is it? It is ludicrous only by standards of previous generations which faced experiences different from ours. Their music deals with the issues they faced.
Cage needs to be viewed as a composer of music. While it is hard to consider his music on a par with that of Mozart, his compositions are highly reflective of the day that he lived in and the one that continues to the present. It is an era which is searching for meaning, and questions everything about existence. It is a period of human history just like another, a time which has been marred by threat of nuclear holocaust, political instability, and constant threat of war. After the World Wars, the USA not only faced these problems on external fronts throughout the world, but also faced internal challenges. The 1960's brought an age of circumspection. It was a time where the generation of college students questioned everything from sexuality to Governmental control.
All of these issues culminated in one of the greatest fiascos witnessed by the USA: the Vietnam War. The idea behind it was noble: keep the population of Southern Vietnam free of totalitarian rule. However, the means used by the government, as well as all of the social instability at home led to a disastrous campaign overseas.
What better figure as a composer to be a representative of such an era that Cage himself? Even today, many of the questions raised during the 20th century have yet to be answered by the masses. And when such answers have been found, they lead to further questions. While audiences may prefer euphonious music of Tchaikovsky, the politically motivated operas of Verdi, or the popular music of the Beetles and Rolling stones, they find the message of John Cage unappealing.
Now, I'll be honest, I don't agree with Cage's philosophy, but at the same time, I believe his philosophy perfectly reflects the modern era. It is a time where questions are asked, and while they may be answered, they lead us to more questions. Quite admirably, Cage proceeded forward, searching for those answers, and even though he may have found more questions, he refused to stop right there. Instead, he kept searching for answers. His work reflects this, and needs to be weighed with these considerations in mind. It looks ridiculous on just a quick glance over it, but in reality, there is a great depth to it, one that must not be glossed over when studying music of the 20th century.
The point of Cage's work was to provoke questions. After the discussion in class yesterday, I really want to explore Cage more. While I might not agree with what he says all the time, he does not do work that is superfluous, but that is riddled with meaning. It is the meaning that he intended for his works that I wish to find more about.
Thanks Brad. Job well done.
Throughout his life, as Brad pointed out, Cage asked questions which, even when answered, led to other questions. This in itself should be a tip off that the music he writes will (and is) indicative of a man who is searching for answers, loaded with questions about everything.
The Coca Cola bottle and the street noise observations made by Cage really caused me to think about how I view music and what I think it is. I forget who made the point yesterday, but in reality, music is something that is defined by its age. Our age is one of postmodernism, one which combines the sublime with the ridiculous to make a statement, or combines different ideas that, while they might be profound independent of each other, create a ludicrous result. Or is it? It is ludicrous only by standards of previous generations which faced experiences different from ours. Their music deals with the issues they faced.
Cage needs to be viewed as a composer of music. While it is hard to consider his music on a par with that of Mozart, his compositions are highly reflective of the day that he lived in and the one that continues to the present. It is an era which is searching for meaning, and questions everything about existence. It is a period of human history just like another, a time which has been marred by threat of nuclear holocaust, political instability, and constant threat of war. After the World Wars, the USA not only faced these problems on external fronts throughout the world, but also faced internal challenges. The 1960's brought an age of circumspection. It was a time where the generation of college students questioned everything from sexuality to Governmental control.
All of these issues culminated in one of the greatest fiascos witnessed by the USA: the Vietnam War. The idea behind it was noble: keep the population of Southern Vietnam free of totalitarian rule. However, the means used by the government, as well as all of the social instability at home led to a disastrous campaign overseas.
What better figure as a composer to be a representative of such an era that Cage himself? Even today, many of the questions raised during the 20th century have yet to be answered by the masses. And when such answers have been found, they lead to further questions. While audiences may prefer euphonious music of Tchaikovsky, the politically motivated operas of Verdi, or the popular music of the Beetles and Rolling stones, they find the message of John Cage unappealing.
Now, I'll be honest, I don't agree with Cage's philosophy, but at the same time, I believe his philosophy perfectly reflects the modern era. It is a time where questions are asked, and while they may be answered, they lead us to more questions. Quite admirably, Cage proceeded forward, searching for those answers, and even though he may have found more questions, he refused to stop right there. Instead, he kept searching for answers. His work reflects this, and needs to be weighed with these considerations in mind. It looks ridiculous on just a quick glance over it, but in reality, there is a great depth to it, one that must not be glossed over when studying music of the 20th century.
The point of Cage's work was to provoke questions. After the discussion in class yesterday, I really want to explore Cage more. While I might not agree with what he says all the time, he does not do work that is superfluous, but that is riddled with meaning. It is the meaning that he intended for his works that I wish to find more about.
Thanks Brad. Job well done.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
More on Cage
Hey all,
Just a short note about one of the many, many John Cage-related YouTube clips out there: Brad played a short clip today that juxtaposed John Cage speaking directly into the camera with Rashaan Roland Kirk speaking into a microphone. The short clip is actually from a short film from 1966 called "Sound??" which, luckily, is still on YouTube in its entirety here.
For those of you not familiar with Rashaan Roland Kirk, the way-too-short version is that he was a blind jazz musician famous for being able to play multiple instruments (usually saxophones) simultaneously, and for his constant exploration of new sounds, new instruments, and new ways to make the audience think. "Sound??" does an excellent job of complementing Cage's philosophical statements with Kirk's musical experiments. It runs nearly 25 minutes, but it's well worth the time investment. Check it out if you get a chance.
Meeting John Cage halfway?
So I decided to try a listening exercise on the way home today. It takes about 20 minutes to walk to my apartment from the Fine Arts building and it's usually a pretty mind-numbing experience. Lots of time for thinking but not much else, right? Well, not really. So I tried to emulate John Cage and listen for every sound I could possibly notice. Obviously, since I'm not a Zen master (or master at much else) I didn't expect a mind-altering experience. It was intriguing, however, and I learned a few valuable things. #1: Ventilation systems on top of buildings are loud. Multiple times on my walk I would think that I was in a period of silence only to realize there was a (fairly loud) hum coming from nearby. #2: The Doppler effect (approaching sounds get louder and vice versa) is still cool. My 8th grade science teacher illustrated this by running down the hall past her class, yelling at the top of her lungs. It was a well-known occurence to the students. #3: There is a rather quiet beginning and a loud climax to my walk before a gradual dying away. Like an ABA' form? The last part of my walk is along Limestone, crossing a major intersection. Then, the fascinating part is that once through the intersection, there will almost always be a period of "total silence" or at least absence of traffic noise on this busy street. Suddenly, life's pace slows down dramatically. Today there was a solo birdsong during this portion of the composition...I mean, walk. And #4: This made the experience more interesting and showed me how lazy the human mind can be, thinking things are boring or taxing.
An edition is being readied for publication as we speak. Be sure to pick your copy of "20:00" soon. Maybe I'll even autograph it. :P
My iPod
So....my iPod probably has some of the most embarrassing music on it in the class. I should start off by saying that I like popular music. Ever since I started college, most of my friends have made fun of my musical taste. It's not to say that I don't have any, but I choose to have poor taste by most music major's standards. I think it boils down to my idea that the music I listen to away from school should be fun and to some extent.....mindless. I don't mind catchy drum beats and I-IV-V-I progressions. It's fun to me. I spend so much of my time working on, studying, understanding, and listening to "Serious" music that I don't care to listen to it when I am walking to get coffee or cleaning my apartment. I like to sing along and dance and be silly from time to time. It's a good thing not to take yourself too seriously. So now that I am done defending my musical taste, here is a list of music that is currently on my iPod.
I should start with the singer/songwriters because they are my favorite.
Jason Mraz: If you get past what's on the radio and look for the live and unproduced records, you can find a lot of interesting songs and lyrics. He is one of my favorite performers and I have every album, bootleg disc, and have seen him in concert 3 times now. I like his music because the words are thought out and interesting and like poetry. There is also a sense of humor in his music that I appreciate.
The Beatles: This is the first band that I can really remember listening to as a child. My parents were big fans and I remember knowing all of the words, and even making up the words when I couldn't understand them because I was so young. I always come back to them and the music has never become dull to me after all of these years.
Carol King: My mom always sang her songs around the house, so the "Tapestry" album holds a special place in my heart.
David Gray: I like his lyrics and his British accent.
Jack Johnson: I have every album and for the most part like how calm and soothing his music is.
Ben Harper: His songs are eclectic and different and I only caught on to his music by accident.
Here are the rest that I like from this category.
Adelle
Duffy
Alicia Keys
A Fine Frenzy
Fionna Apple
John Mayer
Matt Costa
Bare Naked Ladies
Oasis
Bush
I also like pop music and I won't try to justify why I like it except that the music is fun to dance to or catchy to sing, and I am not embarrassed to admit that I like it.
Britney Spears
Madonna
Justin Timberlake
Beyonce
Eve
Ludacris
Jay-Z
Kelly Rowland
Pussy Cat Dolls
Rhianna
Pink
Mariah Carey
Lady Gaga
Jennifer Hudson
Fergie
I also have a large amount of Classical Repertoire. I love Brahms, so I have all of the symphonic works and the clarinet pieces. I have a recording of almost every piece of standard clarinet literature to use as references for my own playing. I have all of the big Stavinsky Pieces, and Strauss, and Beethoven, Kodaly, Penderecki, Mendehllsohn, etc. I love this music. I wouldn't be in the profession I am in if I didn't have a great amount of love and respect for it. It has become one of the biggest parts of my life aside from friends and family. I should always buy more and listen to more. There simply isn't enough time in the day to get to all of the music I would like to hear.
Hope I didn't ramble.
I should start with the singer/songwriters because they are my favorite.
Jason Mraz: If you get past what's on the radio and look for the live and unproduced records, you can find a lot of interesting songs and lyrics. He is one of my favorite performers and I have every album, bootleg disc, and have seen him in concert 3 times now. I like his music because the words are thought out and interesting and like poetry. There is also a sense of humor in his music that I appreciate.
The Beatles: This is the first band that I can really remember listening to as a child. My parents were big fans and I remember knowing all of the words, and even making up the words when I couldn't understand them because I was so young. I always come back to them and the music has never become dull to me after all of these years.
Carol King: My mom always sang her songs around the house, so the "Tapestry" album holds a special place in my heart.
David Gray: I like his lyrics and his British accent.
Jack Johnson: I have every album and for the most part like how calm and soothing his music is.
Ben Harper: His songs are eclectic and different and I only caught on to his music by accident.
Here are the rest that I like from this category.
Adelle
Duffy
Alicia Keys
A Fine Frenzy
Fionna Apple
John Mayer
Matt Costa
Bare Naked Ladies
Oasis
Bush
I also like pop music and I won't try to justify why I like it except that the music is fun to dance to or catchy to sing, and I am not embarrassed to admit that I like it.
Britney Spears
Madonna
Justin Timberlake
Beyonce
Eve
Ludacris
Jay-Z
Kelly Rowland
Pussy Cat Dolls
Rhianna
Pink
Mariah Carey
Lady Gaga
Jennifer Hudson
Fergie
I also have a large amount of Classical Repertoire. I love Brahms, so I have all of the symphonic works and the clarinet pieces. I have a recording of almost every piece of standard clarinet literature to use as references for my own playing. I have all of the big Stavinsky Pieces, and Strauss, and Beethoven, Kodaly, Penderecki, Mendehllsohn, etc. I love this music. I wouldn't be in the profession I am in if I didn't have a great amount of love and respect for it. It has become one of the biggest parts of my life aside from friends and family. I should always buy more and listen to more. There simply isn't enough time in the day to get to all of the music I would like to hear.
Hope I didn't ramble.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Is that innovation, or are you just happy to hear new music?
For this blog post, I am going to play devil’s advocate. As I’ve read about and listened to the music of the composer’s we’ve covered so far I have been plagued by a burning question: is this really innovation? On the surface, the answer would seem to be an obvious “yes.” Putting coins in a piano, inventing instruments, mish-mashing American folk tunes, and piling towers of dissonance…how could it not be innovative?
The OED defines an innovator as:
A. One who innovates; an introducer of novelties or new methods; a revolutionist.
B. A changer or alterer of (a thing) by innovation.
Focusing solely on part 2 of A, “an introducer of novelties or new methods,” I’ll concede that most of our subjects qualify. But definition A goes on to add, “a revolutionist.” What revolution did Ives cause, other than a posthumous rush to throw his compositions onto concert programs? Partch attempted to revolutionize tuning. Did his revolution take? No; the western twelve-tone system is as dominant as ever.
Indeed, it is the “revolutionist” definition along with part B, “a changer or alterer of (a thing)…” that are most useful to us. The OED further defines “(a thing)” in its “innovation” definition as “what is established.” So an innovator must alter and change what is established.
What was “established” in America the early twentieth century? In short, the European, romantic style of art music. The principal mediums for musical expression were the symphonic orchestra, opera, and ballet. Today the American musical scene is dominated by “popular music”, experienced principally through recordings, both audio and video. The western twelve-tone system remains dominant, and one would be hard pressed to find much dissonance on most iPods.
One must ask, then, how we got from point A (then) to point B (now). Did Carl Ruggles’ small, dissonant output help establish the 3 ½ minute song? Is Cowell’s prepared piano heard in piano bars?
These men were mind-bendingly creative, and their experiments with music are fascinating. They deserve their places in the pantheon of experimentalists. Many were also musical philosophers; Cage’s classic attack on what we think of as music, “4’33”” is a great example. (This idea of composer-philosophers deserves its own blogpost) Ultimately, however, innovation requires more than new ideas. These ideas must change something and affect something. This point is illustrated by one of our “innovators” who actually innovated.
Edgard Varese’s writing for percussion revolutionized its use in orchestral writing, both within and without the art music world. Compare Tchaikovsky’s use of percussion to that of composer’s post-Varese. Beyond the conservative use of cymbals, bass drum, triangle, and timpani, there is not much. Take a listen to a John Williams soundtrack, and you’ll hear Varese’s reach into both the high art and popular realm. He created something new that revolutionized part of the established order.
OK, that’s a super-duper overly simplified reading of the history, but this idea has been with me throughout all of my exploring. It’s one to keep in mind, I think. Consider this: Who is more innovative, Henry Cowell, or the people that invented and disseminated Rock ‘n Roll?
Let the hate mail (er, posts) come in. Nothin’ like a good intellectual exercise!
The OED defines an innovator as:
A. One who innovates; an introducer of novelties or new methods; a revolutionist.
B. A changer or alterer of (a thing) by innovation.
Focusing solely on part 2 of A, “an introducer of novelties or new methods,” I’ll concede that most of our subjects qualify. But definition A goes on to add, “a revolutionist.” What revolution did Ives cause, other than a posthumous rush to throw his compositions onto concert programs? Partch attempted to revolutionize tuning. Did his revolution take? No; the western twelve-tone system is as dominant as ever.
Indeed, it is the “revolutionist” definition along with part B, “a changer or alterer of (a thing)…” that are most useful to us. The OED further defines “(a thing)” in its “innovation” definition as “what is established.” So an innovator must alter and change what is established.
What was “established” in America the early twentieth century? In short, the European, romantic style of art music. The principal mediums for musical expression were the symphonic orchestra, opera, and ballet. Today the American musical scene is dominated by “popular music”, experienced principally through recordings, both audio and video. The western twelve-tone system remains dominant, and one would be hard pressed to find much dissonance on most iPods.
One must ask, then, how we got from point A (then) to point B (now). Did Carl Ruggles’ small, dissonant output help establish the 3 ½ minute song? Is Cowell’s prepared piano heard in piano bars?
These men were mind-bendingly creative, and their experiments with music are fascinating. They deserve their places in the pantheon of experimentalists. Many were also musical philosophers; Cage’s classic attack on what we think of as music, “4’33”” is a great example. (This idea of composer-philosophers deserves its own blogpost) Ultimately, however, innovation requires more than new ideas. These ideas must change something and affect something. This point is illustrated by one of our “innovators” who actually innovated.
Edgard Varese’s writing for percussion revolutionized its use in orchestral writing, both within and without the art music world. Compare Tchaikovsky’s use of percussion to that of composer’s post-Varese. Beyond the conservative use of cymbals, bass drum, triangle, and timpani, there is not much. Take a listen to a John Williams soundtrack, and you’ll hear Varese’s reach into both the high art and popular realm. He created something new that revolutionized part of the established order.
OK, that’s a super-duper overly simplified reading of the history, but this idea has been with me throughout all of my exploring. It’s one to keep in mind, I think. Consider this: Who is more innovative, Henry Cowell, or the people that invented and disseminated Rock ‘n Roll?
Let the hate mail (er, posts) come in. Nothin’ like a good intellectual exercise!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)