We began about 2 minutes late with almost all the class present and started discussing experimental music, post 1950. Any discussion of experimental music cannot be made without an understanding of two things: music of John Cage and a broad definition of music. A good video of John Cage helps articulate his view of music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcHnL7aS64Y. Cage's experiments in sound including prepared piano led the way to the "happenings" movement of the 1960s. Happenings were musical and extra-musical experimental events that qualify as sound or aural events in time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happening). Happenings have led to performance art of today which seems to be reserved for nightclubs or college activities on certain campuses. But there is no denying the influence of the various musical experiments of the 60s.
If music is sound, regardless of its system or organization, and regardless of man's attempt to compartmentalize its role and purpose, then it stands to reason that music is only limited by man's creative spirit. With that in mind, we jumped into some sounds and music that are being performed today. The influence of John Cage cannot be overemphasized, but equal to Cage, although in a more traditional framework, is the music of Edgar Varese. We listened to Arcana and a little bit of Ameriques and discussed the sounds and approach of Varese. A bit strident at times, shocking, yet oddly sensitive, Varese's music opened the door to new sounds and textures for future composers.
The composers Ligeti, Lutoslawski, Babbit, Xenakis, and Stockhausen to name just a few have all been involved with experimentation and searching for new sounds and aural expression. A riveting recording of Kontakte by Stockhausen led us to a wide variety of opinions and discussion. Some students are uncomfortable with music that cannot be performed live. Others enjoyed the complexity of sound but tended to associate that with particular images. Kontakte then took us to a different kind of piece called Helicopter String Quartet by Stockhausen. Each member of the string quartet plays inside a flying helicopter where the sound is heard on the ground by the audience. We listened to approximately 6 minutes of the lengthy piece and all of us were pretty taken with the concept and the resulting sound. Perhaps this is due to the direct imagery of 4 helicopters, not sure though.
A quick shift of thought took us back to minimalism, landing on the music of Phillip Glass. We listened to a few examples and discussed his remarkable career in film music. Historically, minimalism grew out of the tension of the 1960s with a pulsating, process-oriented style exemplified by Terry Riley and Steve Reich. Eastern mysticism and subtle development in increments characterize minimalism. Beginning with early efforts including Einstein on the Beach, Philip Glass has had a tremendous influence on music. In an almost unprecedented rise, Philip Glass's career took a meteoric rise several years and he became one of the most sought after film composers of our time.
We concluded with comments about minimalism and other kind of music of today. It was not quite an earth-shattering day, but we did cover some modern material, leaving all us feeling both enriched and maybe a little confused. What is music? Is there a place for experimentalism in today's world? Do you like Minimalism in music?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I felt like the discussion was good but very prejudice. I wrote my thoughts about that day on my blog but I felt it'd be too long for a comment on here. If you want to read it go to:
ReplyDeletehttp://quixotestimemachine.blogspot.com/
At one point in time I felt like John Cage and his chance music was worthless. I thought he was just a man with a huge ego trying to make his mark in the music world. Now I realize, first that he was high on shrooms, and second that there was really purpose in these so called happenings and they really did influence the music that came after. Especially electronic music.
The Kontake was my favorite piece from that day and I don't understand all the negativity towards it. If you want to give it a fair chance read these program note about it and listen to it again.
I’m referring to the time in which we live, time in an extraterrestrial sense. I’m referring to the twelve universal months, each lasting approximately 2,100 years. I’m referring to our coming from the bimillennium of Pisces, which goes from 150 BC to 1950, and which is the sign of Christ, preceded by the sign of Aries. The era of Aquarius began in 1950 and will end in 4050. I’m referring, of course, to a characteristic trait of this sign: Aquarius gradually circumbscribes the radiating force of the arts inherited in the era of Pisces. So, the artist, deprived now of every individual or public defense, limits his activity to a kind of esoteric expression, and ends up performing in fringe clubs, as a rarefied phenomenon intended for the select few.
To answer the questions:
I feel like music is sound, whether divinely organized or by man.
Experimenting is the only way to avoid stagnation.
Minimalism serves it's purpose in music.
This whole class period makes me want to write a book here on the blog...I'll try to keep it shorter than that, but it may sound a bit random as a result. FYI, I have not yet viewed the John Cage video or read about the "Happenings" at Wikipedia.
ReplyDeleteYour description of "happenings" made me think of the drum circles that are popular just now. A little more narrowly focused, perhaps, but similar in social construction.
And now for something that may sound as "way-out" to others as Pedros' paragraph on astrology did to me:
I am a firm believer in the Sovereignty of God. Odd, maybe, to bring a discussion of theology into this class, but here's what I'm thinking: if God truly is Sovereign, then all sound is organized sound, and therefore music. It's not humanly organized, as per Mr. Beaumont, but it's Intelligently organized, whether it seems so to us or not. The Bible makes some intriguing statements about this...one phrase that captures my attention is the concept of stars singing--and it was universally thought that that was poetic language until recently when it was discovered that stars do, indeed, emit sound waves.
In my mind this subject all melds with chaos theory(if you know anything about chaos theory, think of it in terms of minimalist music...that should make you raise your eyebrows!), theology, psychology and physiology. (For instance, why did Dr. Tucker ask us to try to refrain from making visual images to go with some of this music? We all, including him, found it nearly impossible...and that is physiological: sound and vision areas of the brain stimulate each other, though the images are conditioned, as Stephen mentioned).
Here's another thought on defining music: In listening to the music and then listening to the class reactions to it, it dawned on me that maybe we've been trying to define music from too human-centered a point of reference. Perhaps we like music that organizes us! Perhaps composers are simply putting into performance or on paper sound that organizes him/her. Those who are more open to being organized in many different ways are more open to many different types of music.
When He listens, what does God hear?
Finally, I think what we at Howard Payne should be challenged to think about is this:
How can any kind of music, including minimalist, prepared piano, electronic, "happenings", and three-chords-and-the-truth country/western be used to glorify God?
I have no doubt that it can. I sincerely doubt enough musicians are thinking deeply and effectively about this.
Can faculty and students at HPU be the "think-tank" that begins an effective discussion on it?
just as I read the words chaos theory in your paragraph a moth flew, flapping it's wings, and landing on my screen. Now this moth is no butterfly but I can't stop thinking that there maybe a storm a comin.
ReplyDeleteThe problem I find in defining music is making the definition functional. If all sound is music, than the word music is irrelevant. It has no difference from the word sound.
ReplyDeleteIf that is the case than is there a difference between a Brahms Sonata and a tree falling in the woods?
I think there is a difference. Thus inorder to define the difference I call the "man made sound intended for listening" music, and the tree in the woods I call a sound.
-Stephen
I really liked Esther's theological discussion. I hadn't thought about sound that way before, but it is true. But isn't it also true that there is a lot of sound that doesn't bring glory to God because it is evil and sinful? So what does this mean for music? Is John Cage any less glorifying than a Bach cantata? I think a lot of it has to do with the attitude in which the piece was written.
ReplyDeleteMy definition of music is changing and growing...and as I say that I think that the word "define" should never be used in the same sentence as music. That said, when I am alone in nature, I sense God's presence in the beauty of sight and sound. I think wind, trees falling, wings flapping, waves, etc. are music and they are evidence of our Creator (Romans 1 comes to mind). The repose of these moments gives purpose to my own musical creation. I think that is why I have such a problem with recorded sound in a "live" performance." It lacks authenticity and seems a bit unnatural. I appreciate the experiments for what they are though. Minimalism... I love it. (Waves on the ocean).
ReplyDeleteKudos on the stars singing info, Esther. I like it.
Pedro, I think you might be taking up some of John Cage's habits.
--Olivia
Sound can be sound and music at the same time. A tree falling may only make sounds to me but to you it could sound like music. I agree that the definition of music should not be: any sound. There is a difference. Which is why I said 'I feel' like music can be sounds.
ReplyDeleteHonestly there is no point in trying to label and define such a thing as music. Music is personal. Music, no matter how compartmentalized in definition, will always be different for everyone. Our class is proof of this.
Here's what the online dictionary says music is:
1. an art of sound in time that expresses ideas and emotions in significant forms through the elements of rhythm, melody, harmony, and color.
2.the tones or sounds employed, occurring in single line (melody) or multiple lines (harmony), and sounded or to be sounded by one or more voices or instruments, or both.
What do mean Olivia? I definitely don't do shrooms if thats what you're implying!!!
ReplyDeleteHilary;
ReplyDeleteI happen to believe that even evil will ultimately bring glory to God. Therefore, even that music that is evil does/will serve His ultimate purpose. Feel free to PM or email me any time for more Deep Theological "Magic" discussions! lol.
The 2 videos from yesterdays class are on youtube.
ReplyDeleteMy apologies, Pedro!
ReplyDelete--Olivia
Cage said that Mozart and Beethoven always sound the same, but silence today is traffic and it always sounds different. ???? Any thoughts on this?
ReplyDelete--Olivia
Where did my comment go!?! How very sad! :( Now I'll never remember everything I said... *deep sigh*
ReplyDelete~a very sad Kandice
To Olivia,
ReplyDeleteSame in the sense that they are composed. Mozart and Beethoven wrote out exactly (or as close as notation allows) what they wanted to be produced, sound wise, when someone performed their music.
So if you think about it... When someone asks you to humm the melody from the Symphony No. 40 in g min. by Mozart, your mind instantly recalls the tune. It's always the same. The original Sym 40 will never change. Interpretations may differ but I don't think Cage was getting that literal.
Traffic on the other hand never sounds the same. Its not composed. Since he's talking about all sounds being music, I think he was emphasizing the element of chance in the music of 'traffic'. The traffic in slience part I think is only to say that it's hard to get far enough away from the industrialized world to truly experience silence.
This is just my interpretation of that last part of the interview. Maybe my interpretation is a bit overanylized but I felt like he was sort of calling Beethoven and Mozart boring because it always sounds the same and pushing the idea of sound as music and chance music.
I have a hard time defining music. A definition is what is commonly believed to describe something. If there are so many opinions of whether or not sound is music and whether it has to be organized by man or if it can just be sound, then the definition has to run deeper than the simple "all sound is music" definition. Most likely music is what each person defines it as. If you need something more concrete, then music might be what causes a certain effect in your inner being. Maybe music is just a person's inner rhythm of life. If all sound aligns with your life rhythm, all sound is music.
ReplyDeleteAfter watching the John Cage video, I've decided that I judged him wrong before. People don't necessarily have to agree with him, but I now know that his ideas are more intelligent and thought out than ludicrous.
What Esther said about music rings true with me. I believe that God has organized all sound and everything is controlled by him. If that is true, then all sound is organized and can be called music.
ReplyDelete