| New book: Surprise Me with Beauty: the Music of Human Systems |
| http://www.metatronpress.com/nj/smwb.html |
| Latest CDs: Collaborations/ All Souls http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt |
| Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List |
- -
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 13:20:44 -0800
From: skip Heller <velaires@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: music defined (indeterminacy)
on 3/27/02 12:53 PM, s~Z at keithmar@msn.com wrote:
>>>> The composer is only the first step in the process, tho. He
> may drive the
> cab, but -- my opinion and only that -- the passengers are the
> ones who
> decide whether or not they made it to an appropriate
> destination.<<<
>
> Wow. Composing is to cabdriver as listener is to passenger.
> I hold the art of composing in a bit higher regard than that.
> This analogy ignores the incredible combination of technique
> and inspiration required to create art. And to put the 'measure'
> of artistic merit in the hands of the audience. That pretty much
> demolishes most of the art this list holds dear. I am so thankful
> that Vinny Golia, to use an example relevant to us here in the LA
> area,
> keeps on composing and playing even though a very tiny portion of
> Southern California listeners are hailing his cab. If LA listeners
> are
> the judge and jury of his art, he'd be better off driving a cab.
>
I think of the composer as being in specialized tour guide position. You've
got some scenes (call them whatever you like) you want people to encounter,
they're at the mercy of the route you take 'em on. It requires a different
set of specialized tools, but the premise is the same. The audience is
passengers for where you aim to take them. It's their decision as to
whether or not they got there.
As for the audience, I'm not talking about audiences at large. I'm talking
about the people who make it a point to sign on for the tour in question.
Vinny's crowd has a better idea of whether he made his point or not than
maybe he does -- he's in the position of having to make sure the music
getting made is in line with what he's designed, so he doesn't really get to
be off the bandstand seeing how the music's being recieved by the people who
made it a point to check out what he's bringing to the show. And, when
you're dealing with something as complex and stylized as what Vinny does,
it's a bit much to ask him to be composer, conductor, AND listener. They
(the audience members) know what tour they're going on (to a degree), and
it's left up to them as to whether or not the trip was worth it. They paid
the money, so its their perogative to approve or not.
As someone who actually makes a living as a composer (granted, for a more
general audience than someone like Vinny) right here in Hollywood, I will
allow this much -- I've met more good composers here than I have met good
cabdrivers.
skip h
- -
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 16:23:57 -0500
From: <wlt4@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: wiper music/film
>if skip tapes the wipers and plays the tape for >his friend, it is music.
There's a short film (I forget the title or creator but he's Canadian) that's shot from inside a car looking out the windshield and is edited to the rhythm of the wipers. Much more interesting than it may sound.
- -
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 16:14:11 -0600
From: Joseph Zitt <jzitt@metatronpress.com>
Subject: Re: music defined (indeterminacy)
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 10:12:16AM -0800, Patrice L. Roussel wrote:
> But since Cage favored so much random choices in music making, he is defini-
> tely consistant (which makes you wonder why he even cared composing since
> he worked so hard for the disappearance of the composer).
If you pay attention to the works, especially the later ones, you
discover that a lot of careful composing went on. While he used
chance, it was, very importantly, for some but not all parameters.
> I don't call
> the vision of the sky a picture, but the vision of the sky can be used to
> make a great painting.
I doubt anyone would call it a "picture", but there's no need to do so,
But it can be art for you if you choose to see it that way.
In a world full of beauty, why would someone insist that another person
package it (also called composing) before allowing himself to see it as
| New book: Surprise Me with Beauty: the Music of Human Systems |
| http://www.metatronpress.com/nj/smwb.html |
| Latest CDs: Collaborations/ All Souls http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt |
| Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List |
- -
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 16:45:01 -0600
From: Joseph Zitt <jzitt@metatronpress.com>
Subject: Re: music defined (indeterminacy)
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 01:39:39PM -0800, Patrice L. Roussel wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2002 16:17:08 -0600 Joseph Zitt wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 02:06:38PM -0500, Michael Berman wrote:
> > > well then any person encountering random sounds can determine its music if they hear it as such, which just made the 'audience' the 'artist'. no?
> >
> > Yes. Is that a bad thing?
>
> No. And if somebody wants to call plumbing litterature, and another
> scubadiving poetry. Why not? As long as people feel happy, they can call
> anything they want the way they want. And if the communication gap keeps
> on increasing, that's the fault of people who are calling a chair a
