ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/zorn-list/archive/v02.n062

Internet Message Format | 1997-02-09 | 26KB

From:      [e-mail]
To:        [e-mail]
Subject:   zorn-list Digest V2 #62
Reply-To:  [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence:


zorn-list Digest          Sunday, 9 February 1997      Volume 02 : Number 062

In this issue:

    about E.O.E. on WordSound
    Re: about E.O.E. on WordSound
    Re: zorn-list Digest V2 #61
    spare radio
    Re: spare radio
    Re: zorn-list Digest V2 #61
    Re: Zorn book blurb
    radical jewish culture?
    Re: radical jewish culture?
    Re: Zorn book blurb
    Re: Zorn book blurb
    keith drudge email address
    Re: Zorn and Cage and back to Zorn
    Telephone Co. Petition for Internet surcharges
    Re Zorn/Cage
    Re: Zorn and Cage and back to Zorn
    Zorn At Knit. Tonight
    Re: Zorn and Cage and back to Zorn
    Einstein & quantum physics (was Re: Zorn and Cage...)
    Re: Zorn and Cage and back to Zorn
    Re: Einstein & quantum physics (was Re: Zorn and Cage...)

See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the zorn-list
or zorn-list-digest mailing lists and on how to retrieve back issues.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Patrice L. Roussel" <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 16:45:15 -0800
Subject: about E.O.E. on WordSound

    Does anybody know about:

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*** - EQUATIONS OF ETERNITY: E.O.E

  Bill Laswell; Mick Harris.

    ???? - WordSound Recordings (USA), ??? (CD)

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is new? Any comments?

    Patrice.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Patrick Carey)
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 04:14:21 -0500
Subject: Re: about E.O.E. on WordSound

>Does anybody know about:

>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>*** - EQUATIONS OF ETERNITY: E.O.E
>
>  Bill Laswell; Mick Harris.
>
>    ???? - WordSound Recordings (USA), ??? (CD)
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is basically an experimental post-dub album featuring Laswell, Harris
& Eraldo Bernocchi (Sigillum S, Somma 1, Simm) that was released in late
1996. Instead of transcribing what has already been written, I will direct
you to either the Mick Harris discography section of the Dub Terrorist
pages at hyperreal

[www.hyperreal.com/music/artists/dub_terrorist]

or Jeff's (who will probably also answer this) Laswell/Axiom site

[www.hyperreal.com/music/labels/axiom].

You should be able to find a track listing and other info at
either of these sites.


- -Patrick




------------------------------

From: Todd Bramy <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 01:22:18 -0800
Subject: Re: zorn-list Digest V2 #61

For those that asked:

Julian Priester indeed is a Seattle resident and, according to my sources,
is on the faculty of Cornish College of the Arts and has been for at least
the past fifteen years. I'm also told this 40ish looking man is pushing
seventy. Amazing.

Todd

***********
"Between two evils, I always pick the one I never tried before."
Mae West
***********
Todd Bramy
[e-mail]
Seattle, WA
***********



------------------------------

From: DR S WILKIE <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:27:48 GMT0BST
Subject: spare radio

I've a spare cd of naked city's 'radio':if anyone has Berne/Frisell
'theoretically' and wants to exchange,please get it touch.
(why does 'bar kokhba' have an '8' on the spine?...)
                                                        Hywel Davies

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Herb Levy)
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 05:58:03 -0800
Subject: Re: spare radio

>(why does 'bar kokhba' have an '8' on the spine?...)

It's the eighth release in the Radical Jewish Culture series.




Herb Levy
[e-mail]



------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Herb Levy)
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 05:58:01 -0800
Subject: Re: zorn-list Digest V2 #61

Todd Bramy wrote:

>Julian Priester
<snip>
>I'm also told this 40ish looking man is pushing
>seventy.

If Priester's pushing 70, he isn't pushing all THAT hard yet, he's 62-63.


Herb Levy
[e-mail]



------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Herb Levy)
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 06:05:59 -0800
Subject: Re: Zorn book blurb

Patrice Roussel wrote:

>
>I think that what annoys Zorn more than anything else are Cage fans who
>used to gobble everything from him as from divine origin.

I wonder if Zorn is bothered by Zorn fans who act this way?

>
>For him, Cage is a great composer and thinker, but that does not mean that
>you have to take everything he did as pure genius.

Ditto for Zorn.

>
>At least, Cage had a strong sense of humour (the same cannot be said of
>many of his worshippers).

Ditto for Zorn.


Herb Levy
[e-mail]



------------------------------

From: slawlor <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 09:32:08 -0500 (EST)
Subject: radical jewish culture?

Hi.  What's this radical jewish culture reference mean?  Does it mean
that the themes of the music are either jewish in nature or have many
influences from that culture or what?  Thanks for the info.

scott K. Lawlor
http://w3.gwis.com/~slawlor


------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Herb Levy)
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 07:29:48 -0800
Subject: Re: radical jewish culture?

>Hi.  What's this radical jewish culture reference mean?  Does it mean
>that the themes of the music are either jewish in nature or have many
>influences from that culture or what?  Thanks for the info.

Zorn's Tzadik label releases discs in several series: Radical Jewish
Culture, Composer Series, New Japan, and  a few others.  (For details, see
the Tzadik Web page (that I obviously didn't check) at the label's
distributor's site <http://kochint.com/tzadik.html> )

The RJC discs draw on Jewish cultural motifs on some level: reconfigured
Klezmer or Sephardic music; odd music theater works like Shelley Hirsch's O
Little Town of East New York, Richard Teitelbaum's Golem, Zeena Parkins
Mouth=Maul=Betrayer (not exactly a theater piece); several Anthony Coleman
things, etc.

These projects are rarely based on the Jewish religion, more often on other
things in Jewish traditions.  The Gershom Scholem quote on the back of all
of the Masada CDs (I assume most folks on the list have at one of those
discs so I won't take the time to type it out here) is very relevant to
this aspect of Zorn's activities.

Bests

H


Herb Levy
[e-mail]



------------------------------

From: "Patrice L. Roussel" <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 09:04:54 -0800
Subject: Re: Zorn book blurb

On Fri, 7 Feb 1997 06:05:59 -0800  Herb Levy wrote:
>
> Patrice Roussel wrote:
>
> >
> >I think that what annoys Zorn more than anything else are Cage fans who
> >used to gobble everything from him as from divine origin.
>
> I wonder if Zorn is bothered by Zorn fans who act this way?

I hope he his!

> >
> >For him, Cage is a great composer and thinker, but that does not mean that
> >you have to take everything he did as pure genius.
>
> Ditto for Zorn.

Hard to disagree :-).

>
> >
> >At least, Cage had a strong sense of humour (the same cannot be said of
> >many of his worshippers).
>
> Ditto for Zorn.

There is still a slight difference: Cage is the darling of academia. Zorn
is still not accepted in this temple.

    Patrice.

------------------------------

From: Jeff Spirer <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 09:52:30 -0800
Subject: Re: Zorn book blurb

At 09:04 AM 2/7/97 -0800, Patrice L. Roussel wrote:

>> >At least, Cage had a strong sense of humour (the same cannot be said of
>> >many of his worshippers).
>>
>> Ditto for Zorn.
>
>There is still a slight difference: Cage is the darling of academia. Zorn
>is still not accepted in this temple.

This is much more true now than when Cage was Zorn's age.  I saw Cage
perform years ago in a university setting and most of the audience walked
out during the final, and most noisy, piece.

Jeff Spirer
http://www.hyperreal.com/axiom/
Axiom Records/Material Communications


------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Tony Reif)
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 14:23:04 +0000
Subject: keith drudge email address

Sorry to bother the list, but if Keith or anyone can reply with his correct
address I will email info about Songlines. My message replying to his
bounced with the usual "explanation" host unknown. Thanks.

Tony Reif (Songlines Recordings)



------------------------------

From: "Patrice L. Roussel" <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 18:07:44 -0800
Subject: Re: Zorn and Cage and back to Zorn

On Thu, 06 Feb 1997 13:27:04 -0700  Larry Solomon wrote:
>
> Bob Boster wrote:
> >I think it's a big mistake to assume that the use of chance operations in
> >Cage's compositional process is the same thing as him "not" composing, or
> >just "flipping coins for 20 years."
>
> I agree with Bob. I'm not sure where Zorn got the 20 year figure, but
> the number should be more like 40 years, since Cage began using chance
> for complete compositions in 1952. Cage also denied that "God wrote his
> music, and not him", when someone so accused him. He said it was silly
> that anyone should think that he (Cage) didn't write his own music.
> Zorn's statements about Cage seem naive and polemical to me.

Zorn's image (flipping coin) is not more naive that Einstein's one (God
does not play dice). In clear: it is a simple way to convey a basic
problem. In Zorn's case (about Cage): the fact that critical decisions in
the process of composing are the result of some random processes.

In one interview Zorn makes it clear that when he composes, every note on
the score is the result of his will and effort.

Because of Cage's actual strong image (to use Zorn's outrageous language:
"everybody is giving him blowjobs"), I find refreshing that somebody challenges
what seems to be mainly unquestioned. And specially somebody who knows what
he is talking about (he is a big amateur of contemporary music).

> Concerning Zorn's music, Joshua Schuster wrote:
> >Instead, Zorn says, he considers
> >the factor of decision making to be a primary element is own compositions.
> >Which is why I think just focusing on fragmentations and collage
> >formalistically is a mistake.
>
> What could be more collage-like than Zorn's music? There is a high
> degree of fragmentation and juxtaposition of styles and ideas. Whereas,
> many of Cage's chance pieces are not collages: e.g., his many works for
> piano, Mesostics, Freeman Etudes, Thoreau pieces, etc.
>
> An aspect of Zorn's approach that interests me, and which relates to
> Cage, is the degree to which Zorn's music is his own creation, and how
> much is attributable to the performers. And where, exactly, does the
> work reside? I am not questioning Zorn's authorship here, but I am
> fascinated by the question of the identity and autonomy of his work. For
> example, if we had several different performances of, let's say
> "Archery", by completely different performing groups, could we still
> identify the work as the same piece and as being by Zorn? If so, what
> are the identifiers?

I agree that it is a very interesting question. The "open form" of Zorn
and Cage's compositions put so much responsability on the performer that
you might wonder if the notion of composer/interpret should not be
revised. You mention ARCHERY, but I think it is even more visible with
COBRA (which is also closer to us).

Ironically, if you ask to a young jazz amateur who wrote MY FAVORITE
THINGS, they will say John Coltrane :-). Maybe one day COBRA will
completely escape Zorn and its composer will be its interpret.

    Patrice.


------------------------------

From: Larry Solomon <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 17:04:14 -0700
Subject: Telephone Co. Petition for Internet surcharges

The following is a forwarded message:

I am writing you this to inform you of a very important matter
currently under review by the FCC. Your local telephone company has
filed a proposal with the FCC to impose per minute charges for your
internet service. They contend that your usage has or will hinder the
operation of the telephone network.

It is my belief that internet usage will be seriously curtailed if users
are required to pay additional per minute charges. The FCC has created
an email box for your comments, responses must be received by February
13, 1997. Send your comments to [e-mail] and tell them what you
think.

Every phone company is in on this one, and they are trying to sneak
it in just under the wire for litiagation. Please pass the word. The
E-mail address to write to is:

[e-mail]

Please forward this email to all your friends on the internet so all
our voices may be heard!
- --

Best!

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Larry Solomon
The Center for the Arts            http://www.AzStarNet.com/~solo
Tucson, AZ
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

------------------------------

From: Scott Russell <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 12:26:55 +0000
Subject: Re Zorn/Cage

An aspect of Zorn's approach that interests me, and which relates to
> Cage, is the degree to which Zorn's music is his own creation, and how
> much is attributable to the performers. And where, exactly, does the
> work reside?

A very interesting point. We live in an age where traditional concepts
or art have been worn away so the blurring of the line between
composer and performer is perhaps one to be observed rather than
dissected. Zorn's music is as much about the people playing it as the
composition itself. He shares this with Duke Ellington and Frank Zappa
(both composers who wrote for specific individuals). I don't, however,
think that any of their works can be attributed to anyone but them.
Even if they don't perfom a piece they still generate the music and/or
organise the context for the performance to take place. This,
generally speaking, defines authorship.

Let me be clear, I wish to celebrate the crossover between player and
composer not separate them into warring camps. I think the whole
question of authorship is fraught with difficulties. There can be no
doubt the creator of a work should receive credit for it but how far
does that extend? Does it include the right to stop others performing
it (see Bernstein vs The Nice)? What about rights to quote or sample
other works (see Negativland, Oswald, Hip-hop and just about any other
popular music development today)? What rights do performers have in
work they are part of (see Henry Kaiser's assertions that Beefheart
didn't write all the magic band's music on his own)?

I offer no answers to these questions because I don't know if there
are any. Hard and fast rules rarely apply to art, there are always
exceptions and other points of view. It seems to me that Zorn
epitomises the truely modern musician; at home in a variety of fields,
encyclopaedic knowledge of his subject, capacity to innovate, ability
to integrate a variety of players into his compositions etc. Zorn and
his ilk (we can argue over who they might be!) could not have existed
in any other century, why chain them down with the outmoded concepts
of the past?

We could argue all day about where the authorship vs the performance
of 4.33 lies but, in the end, it's pointless. Cage thought of it so
it's his. It may be obvious, annoyingly so, but he did it! No-one
else.

But hey! What do I know?

Scott.

------------------------------

From: Larry Solomon <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 11:17:20 -0700
Subject: Re: Zorn and Cage and back to Zorn

Patrice L. Roussel wrote:
>Zorn's image (flipping coin) is not more naive that Einstein's one (God
>does not play dice). In clear: it is a simple way to convey a basic
>problem. In Zorn's case (about Cage): the fact that critical decisions in
>the process of composing are the result of some random processes.

I'm not sure that I understand this, but I can't agree that Zorn's
naivete about Cage compares with Einstein's alleged "naivete" about the
physical universe. If Einstein was naive about physics, I would ask
where that places the rest of us. Einstein was a master of physics and
was deeply involved with it, and he knew the implications of what he was
saying about God throwing dice. Einstein himself was a major contributor
to the development of quantum mechanics and thoroughly understood its
meaning.

However, Zorn's statements about Cage reveal an ignorance of Cage's
ideas on a fundamental level. That Zorn would cavalierly dismiss Cage's
methods as a mere throwing of coins betrays a misunderstanding of Cage's
purpose for doing so, and it misrepresents Cage's music.
- --

Best!

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Larry Solomon
The Center for the Arts            http://www.AzStarNet.com/~solo
Tucson, AZ
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

------------------------------

From: stickman <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 15:11:15 -0800
Subject: Zorn At Knit. Tonight

A friend and i were going to see Zorn tonight at the Knitting Factory,
but we were unsure of what was scheduled. Does anyone know what context
Zorn will be performing in?

I've usually try to check in advance, but am unable to this time.
Sometimes Zorn may be listed, but that doesn't neccessarilly mean that
he'll be performing (For example, did anyone catch Zorn's "Pueblo" at the
Cooler a year or so ago? He sat  down in front of all the musicians on
the floor while they played the same slow 3 0r 4 chord progression for
about 40 min. Quite dull, actually, though the restlessness from the
audience yelling out "Freebird" half way through it cracked up Joey
Baron.)
                Thanks..

------------------------------

From: "Patrice L. Roussel" <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 12:49:56 -0800
Subject: Re: Zorn and Cage and back to Zorn

On Sun, 09 Feb 1997 11:17:20 -0700  Larry Solomon wrote:
>
> Patrice L. Roussel wrote:
> >Zorn's image (flipping coin) is not more naive that Einstein's one (God
> >does not play dice). In clear: it is a simple way to convey a basic
> >problem. In Zorn's case (about Cage): the fact that critical decisions in
> >the process of composing are the result of some random processes.
>
> I'm not sure that I understand this, but I can't agree that Zorn's
> naivete about Cage compares with Einstein's alleged "naivete" about the
> physical universe. If Einstein was naive about physics, I would ask
> where that places the rest of us. Einstein was a master of physics and
> was deeply involved with it, and he knew the implications of what he was
> saying about God throwing dice. Einstein himself was a major contributor
> to the development of quantum mechanics and thoroughly understood its
> meaning.

We all know that. What I was trying to convey is that we should be careful
in taking too seriously a statement when the context is missing. I had
always assumed that Zorn was Cage litterate, and hence I did take this
sentence for what it is: a terse way of summarize something deeper.
A sentence that taken out of context and commented by people not familiar
to Zorn's respect for Cage can lead to endless thread :-).

By making the analogy with Einstein's famous quote, you immediately
reacted showing that you were aware of the context in which he made it.

Now, what I am saying is that Zorn's statement is just the tip of an
iceberg -- the famous missing context (about how he perceives Cage).

> However, Zorn's statements about Cage reveal an ignorance of Cage's
> ideas on a fundamental level. That Zorn would cavalierly dismiss Cage's
> methods as a mere throwing of coins betrays a misunderstanding of Cage's
> purpose for doing so, and it misrepresents Cage's music.

Zorn had been listening to Cage since he was 15 year old. I sincerely
doubt that his understanding of Cage's achievements is naive.

    Patrice.

------------------------------

From: "k.   drudge" <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 16:46:07 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Einstein & quantum physics (was Re: Zorn and Cage...)

> I'm not sure that I understand this, but I can't agree that Zorn's
> naivete about Cage compares with Einstein's alleged "naivete" about the
> physical universe. If Einstein was naive about physics, I would ask
> where that places the rest of us. Einstein was a master of physics and
> was deeply involved with it, and he knew the implications of what he was
> saying about God throwing dice. Einstein himself was a major contributor
> to the development of quantum mechanics and thoroughly understood its
> meaning.

It is untrue that Einstein was a major contributor to the development
of quantum mechanics.  His relativity theories are entirely deterministic,
and throughout his career, Einstein maintained a
stubborn opposition to quantum mechanics; in fact his statement that `God
does not play dice' was a reflection of his deep philosophical opposition
to the theory.  The question of whether he thoroughly understood its
meaning is a different (more difficult) one; did anyone of his generation
(does anyone now) fully  understand the meaning of quantum physics?
I realize this is more or less irrelevant to the thread, but I saw the
statement and had to respond.
All the best,
Keldon


------------------------------

From: Matthew Ross Davis <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 20:01:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Zorn and Cage and back to Zorn

Hi gang,

I'm not sure if this was touched on, but in reading interviews with Zorn, I
got the impression that he is very anti non-emotional; i.e. modern
techniques of composition and musical thinking were cool, but he wasn't
happy with how they lacked emotion. I believe in one interview he actually
called himself a "neo-romanticist" (tho obviously not in the same vein as
Barber or Britten :-)

So, I'm wondering if this attitude is related to the comment about Cage
tossing coins, ipso facto composing without emotional means, and not to any
amout of ignorance on Zorn's part. Thoughts?

And I missed this too (or perhaps this is part of the conflict); what is
the exact quote by Zorn about Cage?

Matthew


| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
m-a-t-t-h-e-w r-o-s-s d-a-v-i-s                university of maryland
http://www.butterfly.net/mozart                       school of music
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |



------------------------------

From: "Patrice L. Roussel" <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 18:59:02 -0800
Subject: Re: Einstein & quantum physics (was Re: Zorn and Cage...)

On Sun, 9 Feb 1997 16:46:07 -0500 (EST)  "k. drudge" wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure that I understand this, but I can't agree that Zorn's
> > naivete about Cage compares with Einstein's alleged "naivete" about the
> > physical universe. If Einstein was naive about physics, I would ask
> > where that places the rest of us. Einstein was a master of physics and
> > was deeply involved with it, and he knew the implications of what he was
> > saying about God throwing dice. Einstein himself was a major contributor
> > to the development of quantum mechanics and thoroughly understood its
> > meaning.
>
> It is untrue that Einstein was a major contributor to the development
> of quantum mechanics.  His relativity theories are entirely deterministic,
> and throughout his career, Einstein maintained a

Hard statements! I guess the following is negligeable:

    - explanation of the photoelectric effect
    - spontaneous and stimulated radiation
    - derivation of the Bose-Einstein statistic

And I am sure that I am forgetting other key achievements (specific
heat?).

Einstein was the first to explicitely introduce quantification of
electromagnetic fields (Planck's introduction of h was more like a
technical trick that lead to a workable expression for the black body
spectrum; Planck did not believe that the introduction of h was more
than that).

Yes, he was not involved at all in the developement of the theory in
the '20s.

Yes, he was opposed to the "orthodox" interpretation of quantum
mechanics, but it does not change the fact that he is with Planck
and Bohr, one the fathers of the theory.

In the early '40s, when Feynman and Wheeler were working on what
would become QED, who did they ask for advice? Einstein.

Of course, I am not even mentioning the fundamental role of relativistic
covariance in the developement of quantum mechanics and QED.

> stubborn opposition to quantum mechanics; in fact his statement that `God
> does not play dice' was a reflection of his deep philosophical opposition
> to the theory.  The question of whether he thoroughly understood its
> meaning is a different (more difficult) one; did anyone of his generation
> (does anyone now) fully  understand the meaning of quantum physics?
> I realize this is more or less irrelevant to the thread, but I saw the
> statement and had to respond.
> All the best,

    Patrice.

------------------------------

End of zorn-list Digest V2 #62
******************************

To subscribe to zorn-list Digest, send the command:

    subscribe zorn-list-digest

in the body of a message to "[e-mail]".  If you want to
subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such
as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-zorn-list":

    subscribe zorn-list-digest [e-mail]

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "zorn-list-digest"
in the commands above with "zorn-list".

Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from ftp.xmission.com, in
pub/lists/zorn-list/archive.  These are organized by date.