Quote:
Originally Posted by SimenN
Hehe, mabye that is your point of view and i accept that, my question was at the start of the thread? is this art? and you say yes, i say no  im sure the man is a good composer, but that 4,33 piece is not composition, and i dont think this way " woow what a genious he turned a concerto in to a 4,33 silence" great idea, i think this way, "what the hell is he doing? inviting to a concerto and have not written a note? this is not music and sure not composition, and they call it a piece, its not" just wanted to dicuss with you what you mean about that piece, he have other pieces like that too, one for piano, one note only " listen to the soundwaves".
All i say to do that "write music" without one single note or any sound, or one note and imagine the rest of the music, listen to the crowd "sneez" i dont see any music in that.
But you well know my opinoin, i wanted to know yours, but the thing that is bothering me is you allways need to insult me, i dont insult you. Discuss with the proper arguments and without insulting the other part, if you say? i dont like baroque, i dont like classical music i like Cage, and i dont consider the old music as art anymore, well i say i dont, but id never call you narrowminded stupid etc. |
Are you doing it on purpose to be dense?
Are you going out of your way not to understand?
"Narrowminded" describes perfectly well your approach to this whole discussion.
You refuse to acknowledge that John Cage made a contribution to musicological thought through the gesture he posed with 4'33", by continually applying YOUR standards af "it needs this element to be officially recognized as music".
THAT is the purest definition of "narrowmindedness".
I will defend to the death your right to compose in a style, and limiting yourself to the harmony, of a period now gone 300 years.
However, if you want anyone to accept your music, you have to accept that musical thought has expanded beyond the bounds to which you are limiting yourself.
No one, least of all John Cage, is saying that 4'33" is a "piece of music". I really, REALLY don't see why you are so tirelessly launching this attack against a piece that had great significance in 20th century thought regarding music.
No one who went to the concert where 4'33" was presented was expecting a concert of baroque and classical music. So no, no one would have been insulted or upset that the pianist walked out onto the stage and did nothing for four minutes and thirty three seconds. The audience would have KNOWN that Cage is an avant-garde thinker. They would have read the programme notes. They would have understood what it was he was trying to bring up as a point about music/silence.
It is not your place to be insulted and offended that someone "performed" a work of "music" that actually contained no notes. Really. It's not.
If you don't understand the gesture, then that's your loss. With every word you write regarding this issue, you clearly demonstrate that you are in absolutely no position to even discuss the very concepts that Cage was exploring.
You are as narrow-minded as the avant-gardistes who reject anything that is remotely tonal.
Isn't it of more concern to you that the two opposite sides of the same coin ("period" composers such as yourself, and avant-garde composers such as a few on this forum who will remain nameless) are both so completely inward-turned that they reject everything in between as well?
I can't put it any more clearly: you and your fellow baroque revivalists are as wrong as the avant-garde extremists in your rejections of everything that is not "you.
There is great, nay.. tremendous! music composed after the baroque and classical periods. Right up to this very day, there is great music being written.
If you are incapable of appreciating it, then do NOT lay the fault on the music or its creator. Lay the fault where it belongs: with your own lack of comprehension.