On why we make music and who is it for

I'll just start this off with a quote

Our specialists in music should pay attention to the songs of the masses. Our specialists in the fine arts should pay attention to the fine arts of the masses. All these comrades should make close contact with comrades engaged in the work of popularizing literature and art among the masses. On the one hand, they should help and guide the popularizers, and on the other, they should learn from these comrades and, through them, draw nourishment from the masses to replenish and enrich themselves so that their specialities do not become "ivory towers", detached from the masses and from reality and devoid of content or life. We should esteem the specialists, for they are very valuable to our cause. But we should tell them that no revolutionary writer or artist can do any meaningful work unless he is closely linked with the masses, gives expression to their thoughts and feelings and serves them as a loyal spokesman. Only by speaking for the masses

What do you think about this quote? Do you think every composer should abide by this? Do you find yourself agreeing wholeheartedly with it?

Do you?

Well if you do, congratulations, you're a Communist.

That quote was made by none other than The Great Leader Mao Tse-Tung in 1942's TALKS AT THE YENAN FORUM ON LITERATURE AND ART.

Source: Talks at the Yenan Forum on Literature and Art

I think this should serve as a good jumping off point in the pursuit of nuance in our reasoning in why we make music and who we make it for. I will also *slightly* counter this with a quote by Morton Feldman (from a portion of a lecture where he's discussing whether or not music is art).

So I asked myself what would I write, if I just didn't think about the length. And then I said what would I write, if I didn't think about the audience. Well there was a review in the Village Voice last week, about a new piece of mine, which I wrote for John Cage big birthday concert. It's for violin and piano - Paul Zukofsky played the violin, Aki Takahashi, who's a sensational, wonderful pianist, played the piano, it's for violin and piano, For John Cage, it's about an hour and ten minutes, and the Village Voice said that I write music in which my lack of concern about an audience - that they might as well be ants. Which I don't think is fair. I don't think it's fair. It's a very serious problem, and I don't think it's fair. How the hell the audience got into this subject, I don't know. I know we needed the French Revolution, but they didn't have to have music to it. I think it's terribly unfair, because a guy says to himself, "Let's make music into an art form, let's see if we can really do something with it, other than a memory or common practice music forms. I think it's unfair to say that he's thinking of the audience as ants. I mean would you say that with Proust? I once read somebody years ago who thought my work was too esoteric. I read one convoluted paragraph to this person, from Proust. She understood every word. Very convoluted, she didn't have any problem. But with my particular type of sentence structure, she didn't understand anything. She didn't understand what related to what ...

So I really want you as my confidante, I want you all as my friends, but I don't want you as my audience. Because the problem is, is that, if music is to be an art form, it has to exist at least six weeks. Give us six weeks without an audience, and maybe something else could happen. So that's what I'm plea-ing for. Accept my good will. And my good nature. And feel that maybe the role of the composer and the audience has to, will, must, and possibly could, change. So what happened to me, even though I never thought that I was Gluck, because all the form movements are pretty conservative. Though I never really thought you know that I was gonna really change anything like bring back a diatonic pattern, to someone with a BA degree, from Colgate. You know, I'm not Phil Glass.

This is a true story, I was a student, just finishing up with Stefan Wolpe. Stefan was a Proletariat twelve-tone composer, there was a hell of a lot of them, and at one time. And I think that he was the best. He would talk about his music as gutter music, he would talk about, the one time he talked about the man in the street, and he was bawling me out, here I was twenty-two, twenty-three years old, and he was telling me the music is too esoteric, just too esoteric. And he's talking about the man in the street, and I was just meeting the artists in Greenwich Village. I was looking out, my eyes were better that time, it was Fourteenth Street and Sixth Avenue, and there was Jackson Pollock walking across the street. And that's my only defence about the man in the street.

And I'm every man, I'm certainly you know, a certain generation of New Yorker. Typical New Yorker. It's the last thing, you know, I'm not from London, I'm not from Paris, and New York intellectuals are not snobs. So it's certainly nothing snobbish - But there's something wrong someplace, there's something wrong someplace.

Source: Morton Feldman: Toronto Lecture

I would recommend reading that whole section in context of the lecture, otherwise it doesn't make complete sense...

I find this thread to be very insulting. Just because there are people out there who believe music should be for the masses (myself included) does not mean they are communist.

The fact that you find being a communist is insulting, insults me Woodruff.

I'm a communist.

Who likes money.

In the eternal words of Elmer Bernstein, "I'm essentially a high priced [slaw], I'll do anything for money."

The fact that you find being a communist is insulting, insults me Woodruff.

LOL that's not what insults me. Its the fact that he is equating 'writing music for the masses' to being communist.

I basically use composition as masturbation. So your music for the masses idea offends me Woodruff.

I basically use composition as masturbation. So your music for the masses idea offends me Woodruff.

That's great! I'm very glad your music is used for copulatory purposes! To each his own, is my opinion - hence the reason this thread offended me. I don't like seeing people draw conclusions on why people do what they do. You want to write music for copulatory purposes, more power to you. You want to write music that appeals to 99% of people, more power to you. You want to sit and label those who don't do what you do, then we have a problem - IMHO.

I basically use composition as masturbation. So your music for the masses idea offends me Woodruff.

That was... Gross. And just as confusing as the rest of this thread.

Honestly, communism being good or bad or insulting aside, even if you agree with someone doesn't mean you automatically follow their political views...

LOL that's not what insults me. Its the fact that he is equating 'writing music for the masses' to being communist.

Come on, I'm not going to be fallacious right out of the gate.

Look, Mao and the other communists were basically against private property of any kind, which included intellectual property. Ya know? There are no individuals, yadda yadda. So if you are one person and you want to compose something and hope a lot of people like it, well you are still being an individual expressing yourself and hoping others will latch on. That isn't THAT different from how anyone else composes. Hell, it's how people tend to make music in general. The greatest bands and artists today started out playing for beer and to 3 people in a club that bothered to listen.

Anyway, the communist perspective would be, "Why are you making this insular nonsense, you have no right to personal expression, change immediately! Express the will of the people"

Slightly oversimplified, but still true.

That was... Gross. And just as confusing as the rest of this thread.

Honestly, communism being good or bad or insulting aside, even if you agree with someone doesn't mean you automatically follow their political views...

This thread has nothing to do with politics at all. It has more to do with fundamental ideology more than anything.

BTW: Masturbation is a pretty clinical term, and can be used metaphorically as seen fit, like YC26 just did.

That's great! I'm very glad your music is used for copulatory purposes! To each his own, is my opinion - hence the reason this thread offended me. I don't like seeing people draw conclusions on why people do what they do. You want to write music for copulatory purposes, more power to you. You want to write music that appeals to 99% of people, more power to you. You want to sit and label those who don't do what you do, then we have a problem - IMHO.

1) How does one write music which appeals to 99% of the people? How do you achieve this? Wouldn't this require some sort of obtrusive regulatory system in order to make sure all people are served equally? Hmmmm :hmmm:

2) I'm not labeling anyone who doesn't "do what I do". This is simply a thread for furthering discussion of a complex issue.

3) Having similar aesthetic and political leanings to mass murderers generally isn't a good thing. I'm not saying a guilt by association or anything, but let's be reasonable about this.

Good, thank you for clarifying.

I write music for my enjoyment first and foremost. I could care less, tbh, whether it is *commercial* or *intellectual*. I'm very personal in my music - and that's one reason I enjoy composing.

1) How does one write music which appeals to 99% of the people? How do you achieve this? Wouldn't this require some sort of obtrusive regulatory system in order to make sure all people are served equally? Hmmmm :hmmm:

It's not difficult actually. All you really have to do is just peruse any number of commercial pop chart to see what people find appealing and what they dont. This is the 21st century after all, its very easy to find what people like and dont like.

2) I'm not labeling anyone who doesn't "do what I do". This is simply a thread for furthering discussion of a complex issue.

Yes, this is a thread for discussion of an issue that truly isn't complex. And yes, you did label those who agreed with that quotation as being communist - which may or may not be the case on an individual basis.

3) Having similar aesthetic and political leanings to mass murderers generally isn't a good thing. I'm not saying a guilt by association or anything, but let's be reasonable about this.

Just because a person agrees with an ideology that is categorized under a particular heading does not mean they themselves fall under that category. The world isn't black and white like that.

Stop taking things so seriously mate

Stop taking things so seriously mate

I'm not taking things seriously, I just get tired of these sort of threads that discuss why we do what we do. It always starts with one persons opinions on why everyone does what they do and then it ends with lots of irate emotions. IF your going to start a discussion like this - at least look at the many other threads in the past that have been on the same topic.

I'm not taking things seriously, I just get tired of these sort of threads that discuss why we do what we do. It always starts with one persons opinions on why everyone does what they do and then it ends with lots of irate emotions. IF your going to start a discussion like this - at least look at the many other threads in the past that have been on the same topic.

I don't recall any thread in the past discussing the correlation between communist dictatorships and the wanton American love for proletariat art.

LOL there wasnt any thread discussing that. The *basic discussion* however of this thread 'the why do you write music* debate has been discussed and argued MANY times.

LOL there wasnt any thread discussing that. The *basic discussion* however of this thread 'the why do you write music* debate has been discussed and argued MANY times.

Are you incapable of nuanced discussion? Please don't derail my thread kthxbai

This is really an interesting discussion, or at least it has that potential. I posted two VERY VERY dynamite quotes.

This is really an interesting discussion, or at least it has that potential. I posted two VERY VERY dynamite quotes.

Neither quote was really that dynamite actually. Its a very old argument that really doesn't have that much impact anymore NOR does it even promote an interesting discussion. Now if this were the 1950s - than maybe YES, it would've been an interesting discussion. BUT go ahead, have your little discussion - its great... I'll sit back and lul. kthxbai

In my opinion neither quote was really that dynamite actually. I think its a very old argument that really doesn't have that much impact anymore NOR does it even promote an interesting discussion.

Just helping the clarity here of what you're trying to say, don't be offended.

More music like that please.

YouTube - The Belarus National Anthem I found this particular anthem to be quite invigorating!

Just helping the clarity here of what you're trying to say, don't be offended.

Yep, I know what I said... and why I said it. LUV YA SSC and miss ya <3

What's with the double posting, guys?

Double posting?

Yeah, you know, making one post right after the other. I think it's common etiquette to group your replies in only one post so you don't clutter the thread.