In recent weeks, there’s been a good bit of conversation at IHM and elsewhere about the virtues, or lack of same, regarding what might be called “conceptual eai”, that is music by that community which takes as its starting point or main feature an idea, generally structural, rather than dealing directly with the interplay and communication between musicians. Indeed, the problem for some is the increasing tendency toward solo recordings, in this vein and others. At least four of the five releases discussed below fall squarely into the “overtly conceptual” category. Richard writes very well and interestingly about three of them in his blog at Learning to Listen, which I strongly suggest checking out for an opinion sometimes at variance with that expressed below.
Toshiya Tsunoda
Low Frequency Observed at Maguchi Bay
hibari
11
The disc consists of four pairs of field recordings. In each instance, the first is a construction of Tsunoda’s that will be roughly familiar to fans of his work and they are beauts, imparting a thrilling sense of space and place. The second is the exact same recording except that one hears only those frequencies below 20Hz. For those of you who, like me, didn’t quite know what to expect at this particular cut-off, it means that pretty much the only surviving sounds are those of the barest, lowest fluttering variety, something like your inner ear might pick up in a soft wind. The “normal” tracks are quiet enough as is; you can make out vaguely watery sounds, night insects, the sound of, possibly, some bay craft knocking gently against an old pier. I have no idea how much or little processing or collaging Tsunoda does on these pieces and don’t really care; they’re lovely as they stand. The alternate cuts might be analogized to extreme solarizations of already delicate photographs, leaving only the faintest outlines. Whereas the first two works are brief (about four and two minutes respectively) and their corresponding reductions easily brooked, the last two measure in at about 13 and 11 minutes. Giving the next-to-nothing tracks one’s full attention requires some patience. For me, the experience was rather rewarding though I don’t hesitate to say that I find the fuller pieces far more fascinating, lovely and deep. I’m not sure of the reasons behind Tsunoda’s strategy here, aside from the almost clinically obvious experimental aspect, but overall, I’d strongly recommend it, even if you skip every other track.
Noid
You’re Not Here
hibari
12
As best I understand it, Noid (Arnold Haberl—I do wish he’d lose this nom) has recorded sound in various empty rooms, emptied these tapes of a certain amount of unwanted noise (which is collected in the one-minute opening track), then layered the results into a laminated void. I love it. “You’re Not Here”, a kind of shadow image of “I Am Sitting In A Room”, with only the “resonant frequencies” left to be heard, sans obvious input. Imagine several photographic transparencies of different interiors laid atop one another. You hear presumably external sounds, vehicles, birds, osmosed through the walls, reverberating faintly within the space, but that’s about all save for the odd bit of clatter and, at one point, some tapping, possibly on a drum, a drip or two. Though the bulk of the disc is comprised of one 65-minute cut, Noid takes a cleaver to it at several points, abruptly and violently lopping off the thrum with a loud shearing sound. This acts to remove any sense of comfort or meditative aspect though as the piece rumbles on, those cuts become less and less abrasive. Around the 45-minute mark, the “rooms” disappear almost entirely for a while and when the sound resurfaces, it’s virtually vibrant, a steady, thick not-quite-hum adorned with a bang now and then. It’s a beautiful piece with a good balance of “real world” and artifice and enough of an edge to keep it from being too soporific. My personal favorite of this bunch as far as pure listening pleasure goes.
Taku Unami
imannengo
hibari
13
Unami’s soundtrack to Isao Okishima’s film “Ichimannen, go…” is the joker in this set of releases, relatively speaking, a 30-minute set divided into eight tracks that wander from style to style in a manner that in some ways is reminiscent of Otomo Yoshihide’s ventures into scoring. The pieces are more internally cohesive than those familiar with Unami’s computer-controlled toys might expect, each standing on its own and consistent within its three or four minutes. The first three cuts occupy noisy electronic territory with some impressively severe spikiness. On the fourth, however, that tendency shares space with sing-songy guitar and spoken voice. It sputters quietly out of existence only to be followed by a bizarre little march with snare, tympani, low brass and calliope-like keyboard; one thinks of those tottering toys again, but in an entirely different manner. Then a half-and-half muted percussion and solo, mournfully romantic violin soliloquy, a staccato, radio-interfered choir intoning an (apparently) traditional, very pretty Japanese song and, to wrap things up, that same song in all it’s unstaticized lushness. Quite a distance traveled from opening to close. My hunch is that the music would work far better in its designated context. On disc, it’s all right though its disjunctive nature is somewhat off-putting.
Taku Sugimoto
doremilogy
Skiti
sk02
A lingering question over the last couple of years in these parts: What’s Sugimoto going to do next after reducing his music to what would seem to be the barest possible minimum? Well, here’s one answer. The first and longest of the three cuts, “doremilogy 1.1” is about 22 minutes of what is apparently (I defer to Richard here) an ebow held against a single guitar string. That’s it (almost). It’s loud enough, especially for a Sugimoto piece, and fluctuates naturally, which is to say not that much but enough if you listen closely at all. You can isolate three or four distinct tones including a faint high one that serves to create a surprising amount of space. It’s totally fine; think pared down Lucier. Ah, but then. Then, in the closing moments, he slides the ebow through a standard scale, hence the do-re-mi of the title. It’s passing strange. It also sets up the ensuing two works, doremilogies nos. 2.13 and 1.21. The first, for three guitars (after a minute of silence) takes those scales via pure plucked tones through their paces, in groups of one, three, five and eight notes, played in solo or unison with two or three guitarists (Unami & Tsunoda, presumably). The guitars seem tuned slightly apart, producing attractive quavers amidst the banal stair step of the scale. It ends with an entirely different scale, a 13-note progression unlike anything that’s preceded it. The finale begins with, I believe, three ebow tones, far more complex therefore, maintained for a few minutes before descending through that same basic scale, ending, and lingering, on the “do” with a huge amount of quiver and thrum, a wonderful sound in and of itself.
I imagine one possible idea was to demonstrate how complex the “simple” can be. Fair enough and effectively done, forcing the listener to deal with that most trite of note series, listening to it in a new context. Still, it seems more of a way station than a destination, so we’ll just have to wait for what comes next.
Taku Unami
Malignitat
skiti
Sk03
Probably the gnarliest of these five offerings, Unami’s excellently titled “Malignitat” comprises three 15-minute compositions wherein a limited number of sound elements are awkwardly juxtaposed alongside one another, a kind of art brut that challenges the listener to understand the rationale behind the placement. The cover of Sugimoto’s “Doremilogy” might be apropos as to the overt blockiness of the compositions here. In the first, a recording of a helicopter engine, a blooping Pong-like sound and some tiny electric clicks appear and disappear among extended silences in what seems like an arbitrary non-pattern, sometimes overlapping, generally not, the engine’s playback speed slowed down here and there. There’s a very alien feel at play as though Unami’s intentionally pushing past the boundaries of human interest with regard to almost any element; rhythmic, structural, tonal, melodic, dramatic—no quarter is given. The second piece uses single, pure guitar notes and high-pitched wood block taps (or their electronic equivalent; hard to tell). There’s a wee bit more “standard” playing here, in brief snatches, but again the structure seems designed to confound. As with the video game sounds on the prior work, sometimes the tapping falls into metronomic sequences; between those and the guitar plucking, Unami appears to be making a very slight concession to the listener; whether that weakens or strengthens the piece is another question. Once staking out the gnomic ground, shouldn’t one stay there resolutely? He does so in fact, again confusingly, bringing back the ‘copter (slowed version) some 11 minutes in where it nestles among the existing elements with opaque aplomb. Malignitat #3 is for solo helicopter (though you hear a car horn on occasion), as before presented in rough chunks, at various speeds, sometimes overlapped, with unpredictable stretches of silence between. This one I could easily imagine as the soundtrack to a film, one that jump cut between superficially unrelated scenes.
All of this, of course, will generate interest and appreciation in at least some listeners while aggravating others as over-aesthetic, effetely intellectual, etc. I was a little put off, and probably puzzled, on first go ‘round though I could appreciate the strategy—at least, what seems to me to be the strategy—on subsequent listens even if I can’t say I enjoyed the listening experience as I did with the Noid and at least half of the Tsunoda. I hold out the option of coming to better grips with it in the future, though.
More generally speaking, count me among those who like to hear new plans of attack. Whether they derive from solitary intellectual activity or direct group interplay (which needn’t omit the intellectual, of course) I don’t think is a crucial matter; people operate on both levels, no reason musicians (most of whom are people) should do any differently. Even if a given effort “fails”, no telling what doors it opens in the process.
Available from erstdist
Posted by Brian Olewnick on November 4, 2007 5:21 PMPerhaps a question would be, if someone released a blank CD to which no data at all had been transferred called "There has been no recording", what would come next?
since all this self-abnegation, removal of 'musical content' [however loaded that term may be] seems to be heading toward a point, however distant, maybe we should speculate on what life would be like on the other side?
Posted by: nothing at November 4, 2007 9:43 PMI don't see too many differences with other "overly conceptual" releases which came well before EAI. Christian Marclay's "Footsteps" comes to mind: blank vinyl, only the noise of the dirt under the shoes of the installation's visitors. There you go. Do you prefer listening to that (and ruin your cartridge in the meantime) or to the outside world while a blank CD is spinning? I am not a Sugimoto believer, but surely I know that his silences mean something, as opposed to, say, someone like Jliat.
Posted by: Massimo Ricci at November 4, 2007 10:06 PMJacob Lindsay has a great term for this kind of thing: post-Cage Machismo.
It is a very Macho statement "My silence is bigger than yours" etc., at that point I'd just rather listen to Brötzmann, at least he is clear on what he is.
On the otherhand, some of it might take many years, Robert Ryman is all the more impressive with such a wide body of work using white paint for 40 years or so. That Brice Marden retrospective at NY and SF MOMAs this year also had a couple decades of beautiful monochromes.
Posted by: damon Smith at November 4, 2007 10:22 PM"post-Cage machismo"
Heh, excellent phrase! Though I'm not sure at all it applies, at least to these guys. Having met him, "machismo" and "Sugimoto" aren't two words I'd think of together.
It's not about newness (necessarily). It's more, to me, about reinvestigating areas (like silences--or Ryman's white canvases, or Reinhardt's black ones) that have been all but declared barren but where there's actually much left to be explored. I believe Prevost once remarked that there was a vast difference between the silences in AMM and those found in contemporary "classical" works, that AMM's was pregnant with potential. I think he was right, though quantifying that sense is, of course, pretty much a fool's errand.
I imagine a blank CD has already been done (Meehan released an empty cassette case a long while back and, I should mention for those keeping track, I've still yet to open his double solo set). Someone may do it again and, on its own, it may not be all that interesting a statement (to say the least). But it may help that indivdual define a boundary from which s/he can swing back, pendulum-like, imparting the knowledge gained there to less recondite work.
If, in five years, Sugimoto's creating brash big band sounds, his ideas will have been informed by his prior explorations and the music will as a result be differently tinged.
Posted by: Brian Olewnick at November 5, 2007 5:45 AM"post-Cage machismo"
exactment. well put. as Brian mentions, it may not line up w/our impressions of these musicians, or their actual personalities, it is "macho," if by a slightly different code.
I think that, as unbearable as some of these more conceptual recordings may be (as "listening music"), releases such as these also show us an artist's progress, as they test their boundaries and their interests along w/those of the audience (however small). I believe that the releases in question are (following Cage) of an experimental nature. we just get to be party to perhaps the lesser successes as well as the great achievements.
Sugimoto, in particular, who has played on many favorite recordings, seems carried by a tide of logic in recent years...the "doremi" compositions are, in his practice, the next step. I'm not the kind that wants every new release to be just like whichever old release is my current favorite, but at least someone is acutally playing the guitar now.
Posted by: billy gomberg at November 5, 2007 7:25 AMIt amazes me that many of the above comments focus on the silence aspect. Both the Sugimoto and Unami albums are amongst the busiest and loudest releases either musician has put out for years and still people just talk about the silences every time Sugimoto is mentioned. Oh well.
I linked these discs together, along with the 5 Modules III disc and one or two others because they seemed to accumulate a combined momentum towards challenging listener expectations of what happens when you sit down to listen to a CD. My expectations for the Sugimoto disc were partly blown away by the fact that the first track actually contains NO silence at all, not even a space between the notes.
Posted by: Richard Pinnell at November 5, 2007 8:45 AMi find this consternation about "challenging listener expectations of what happens when you sit down to listen to a CD" (sorry richard, but i only quote because you were pithy!) a bit strange, and a bit troubling. did this not apply to the previous generation of "EAI" work? or to it's non-improvised forebears? we have just become comfortable and subsumed those aesthetics. given that, it's natural and good that some musicians want to keep pushing forward. i fear that the implication of wanting more pleasant listening experiences is that this music should be approached the way jazz purists do - fear of the new, with innovation replaced by quality of stylism. didn't people feel confused and challenged upon first hearing AMM? (maybe a poor example, given that their cd's tend to be recordings of live concerts). i don't quite get the idea that this sort of approach is somehow really new?
Posted by: jesse kudler at November 5, 2007 9:52 AMPerhaps some of the worries on the part of a few of us is that any art form can (and usually does) get into ruts and we're a bit sensitive to that occurring. Without naming labels, I'm sure we can all think of a handful that, over the last few years, have released what more or less amounts to "easy listening eai". Hell, I think it can be argued that AMM got into this sort of rut late in its existence (at least based on recorded evidence). Which is not to say it's not amazing music--I love "Newfoundland" as much as the next guy, I think it's a very great record, but there is some essential difference between it and, say, "The Crypt" vis a vis a fairly comfortable serenity and a conscious and exhilarating effort to break new ground.
For myself, these approaches should by no means be mutually exclusive; there's more than enough room for both. But whereas something like "Newfoundland" remains extraordinarily deep and beautiful, "third-tier Newfoundlands" can be painfully tiresome. And there are plenty of those around. Whereas, if you will, "third-tier Crypts", that is, overtly exploratory music by musicians perhaps less gifted than AMM-sters (perhaps not!), can still provide substantial aesthetic dividends. (Forgive the hierarchical ranking, but you know what I mean).
Posted by: Brian Olewnick at November 5, 2007 11:00 AMI agree with you Jesse and honestly I think its even worse then that. To me this is an ahistorical view (disregarding the "CD" specificity of course) as these challenges to the listener, challenging "what is music" basically was a prime concern in the mid to late 20th Century. Various Fluxus artists in particular challenged what is music in so many different ways, but included things such as using totally disparate sounds (a helicopter sample anyone?), AMM shows reportedly had silences up to twenty minutes. Twenty minutes! - does even Principia Sugimoto have gaps that long? In the composed realm virtually none of these ideas are without precedence and you can usually find better examples if you look around. That being said I like plenty of these works, Malignitat in particular (doremiology was pretty disappointing to me) but I really find any sort claims for the breaking of new ground to be rather off base. Perhaps these artists are doing new things for themselves, but if Taku Unami released a CD of him beat-boxing for an hour, that'd also be a new thing for him.
Posted by: Robert at November 5, 2007 12:45 PMGood perspective, good framing, ftw, Robert.
Posted by: Jesse at November 5, 2007 12:50 PMI believe Prevost once remarked that there was a vast difference between the silences in AMM and those found in contemporary "classical" works, that AMM's was pregnant with potential. I think he was right...
Do you really think so? Do you have a sense why you think Eddie's Silences should be considered more "pregnant" than, say Feldman's (or Webern's)?
Posted by: walto at November 5, 2007 1:36 PMLike I said, I think it's difficult to quantify, but it may have to do, grossly speaking, with the difference between a compositionally inserted silence and one that arises from improvisation. If you're in the audience and aware that the quintet in front of you is freely improvising, I think an extended silence creates (or created-- maybe not so much today?) that much more tension. If it's composed, the musicians presumably know what its duration will be; not necessarily so with AMM. I think this tension would probably be able to be sensed by the audience.
Posted by: Brian Olewnick at November 5, 2007 1:47 PMThanks, that's interesting. Of course, with some Feldman, there's quite a bit of freedom left to the performers regardding duration choices.
Posted by: walto at November 5, 2007 2:12 PMAnother thing (thinking about it on the way home) was that with AMM, to some extent (within some AMMish limit), almost anything could happen to break the silence in addition to a more elastic duration. With, say, Feldman, there were more limitations of a Feldmanesque nature in effect. Not necessarily less beautiful, just that the range of Feldman possibilities might be less than those of AMM (though we're talking nested, Cantorian infinities... :-)). But after a pause in Feldman, you pretty much know the next sound you hear won't be a radio or someone singing an Irish tune whereas in AMM, the next sound you hear might be Feldman!
Posted by: Brian Olewnick at November 5, 2007 2:57 PMI think I should make it clear here, though it is already clear in my blog post that I have not suggested that there is anything "new" as such going on here. Of course what Unami, Sugimoto et al are doing has been done before in similar ways throughout musical history. Thats pretty obvious really, and I would never suggest any different.
The drive of my blog piece was that as areas of music become established then more standardised forms, structures and methods appear that characterise that area of music. Jesse, I agree that Unami and co are doing nothing different than EAI first did in its infancy, thats one of my points in that post. I drew a ring around these new releases to point out that they are trying to stretch the music away from those characteristics that we have come to expect from modern improv and composition. What goes around, comes around.
Of course similarities can be drawn between what these musicians are doing and other music in the past. I doubt that anything could truly be described as "new" in the world of music any longer, but what these musicians seem to be doing, possibly in some degree of intentional or unintentional unison is doing something new for EAI in particular. That really is all I was trying to get across, highlighting a possible new direction that one area of the music may be heading into.
I should also add here, though it is clear in that blog post, that I don't favour this ""new"" conceptual approach over what could be considered the middleground of EAI right now. I think both have plenty to offer. I just wanted to write about something I'd spotted that interested me.
Posted by: Richard Pinnell at November 5, 2007 3:21 PMimho Sankt Olewnick is a severe case of music that make you think rather than music that makes you listen.
Posted by: uli at November 5, 2007 8:40 PMWell, it's nice to think once in a while. But what I often find with stuff like that is you think the same thing when you hear it again; I like to hear something different when I hear it again:) Haven't heard the latest Tsunoda yet (hopefully will get a copy tomorrow, as Taku U is playing here) but I much prefer the stuff he was doing five years or so compared to the rather arid recent pieces.
Interesting thread though. "Post-Cage Machismo" is a great line.
Richard:
"It amazes me that many of the above comments focus on the silence aspect. Both the Sugimoto and Unami albums are amongst the busiest and loudest releases either musician has put out for years and still people just talk about the silences every time Sugimoto is mentioned. Oh well."
Well, Sugimoto is not known/quoted for eBows and rattling drones, is he?
On the other hand, the difference between nothingness as a compositional choice by artists who have a technical background and "conceptual" silences (or noise, or...) by someone who just wants to jump on the bandwagon and start selling CDs is pretty obvious to me. There are people who stumble on a nice sound once and build careers over it. Still, we should all be able by now to separate pretenders from contenders.
Re "Post-Cage Machismo": I honestly believe that Cage has been more a disgrace to music than else, as I'm more and more convinced that he gave the green light to hundreds of fakes.
Posted by: Massimo Ricci at November 6, 2007 3:39 AMBy the way, regarding this great illumination that Sugimoto had - in 2007 - with "DoReMilogy"...Does anybody remember/know at all Anthony Moore's "Secrets of the Blue Bag"? That was 1972. Different orchestration, same exploration. Indeed coming up with something really new is not easy.
Posted by: Massimo Ricci at November 6, 2007 5:02 AMDan, good point, though there are relatively few works, in any medium, produced each year that consistently generate new thoughts on each encounter, I think we might agree. If something nudges me somewhere I wouldn't have gone otherwise, I think it's worthwhile, even if I get nudged to the same place on subsequent encounters.
Massimo, I think we're overemphasizing "new", especially in any universal sense. I don't know the Moore work you cite but take you at your word that it's more or less conceptually similar to Sugimoto's recording. But one of my points above was that I think you're hearing a number of musicians reinvestigate areas first charted in the 60s-70s, realizing that there's more juice to be wrung, that there remains space to explore. So the work may not be "new" in a deep sense but there still might be value to be gotten (or not).
On that value we may of course disagree. Writing this, I'm obviously aware that a similar argument could be made for 21st century free jazzers building on earlier forms. I may generally find the results arid, others don't, but it doesn't have to do with any "newness" factor.
Posted by: Brian Olewnick at November 6, 2007 5:51 AMso it all seems to come down to what speaks to you, rather than breaking new ground when there's very little new ground left to break [and when the pursuit of it in and of itself is largely self-defeating anyway]
Posted by: evil twin at November 6, 2007 6:11 AMRe "Post-Cage Machismo": I honestly believe that Cage has been more a disgrace to music than else...
Where is Brian Marley??
Posted by: walto at November 6, 2007 7:05 AMrichard - i didn't intend to be calling you out specifically; i read your blog reviews the other night and found them to be interesting and insightful. i also didn't mean to seize on the "newness" angle, if that's what comes across. and, as a caveat, i should also say that i have only heard clips of the releases in question. i suppose what i more meant to get at is how puzzling i find the reactions here and on IHM to be sometimes. i mean, play "weather sky" or something like that to most people, and they will probably find it arid, conceptual, and dry! the trick, i think is to move beyond that. both on the part of the listener and the musicians. do dig deeper into the relationships and dynamics in the music and to try and aesthetize the conceptual elements. that is, to make a compelling piece of art that addresses conceptual concerns while still being enjoyable to experience beyond the pure concept. dan, i think you make a good and fair point here about hearing something different upon repeat listenings. it's the difference between listening to something and just reading about it. but i don't think there's any reason to fear radical approaches, particularly right now.
Posted by: jesse kudler at November 6, 2007 9:12 AMthank you evil twin - you pithily stated exactly what i was thinking! keep it up! it's very nice to find out that one has an evil twin operating somehere in the world.
Posted by: times two at November 6, 2007 9:52 AMJesse, Dan, I generally agree that overtly conceptual music will not be something I play very often, but I wonder (and I'm only wondering, I have no idea of the answer here) if thats really of great concern to Unami, Mattin etc. Its quite possible that measuring music by how often it gets put into the CD player isn't a set of values those musicians rank that highly. I sense that Mattin would be horrified to appear in too many end of year lists, but provoking immediate reaction / thought is his first concern.
The somewhat clumsy analogy I keep thinking of is with Duchamp's Urinal. How many people return to the gallery to look at that piece over and over? Its actually arguable that you don't ever need to see it with your own eyes, its provocative power is purely conceptual.
Having said all that though, with Malignitat in particular I think the music extends well beyond the purely conceptual. I've enjoyed that CD a lot in recent weeks and whilst some of the others in this area may not, Malignitat stands up to repeated listening very well.
But yes Jesse the ideal music to me though would be something that engages and provokes on a conceptual level whilst also involving me on an emotional level. Music like that is hard to find though, as its hard to make. Thats why I leave it to you guys and restrict my contribution to commenting from the sidelines...!
Posted by: Richard Pinnell at November 6, 2007 12:54 PMRe "Post-Cage Machismo": I honestly believe that Cage has been more a disgrace to music than else...
It's that "else" that bothers me.. (haven't edited one of Massimo's pieces for ages..) whaddya mean, chief?
Posted by: Dan Warburton at November 7, 2007 5:29 AMIn a sense, Cage rediscovered, in a characteristically modernist, residual way, something that had been taken for granted in classical German aesthetics. Classically, aesthetics sought to explain beauty as a value. Art wasn't the primary occasion of beauty. Not only could one find beauty in a landscape; classical aesthetics regarded the landscape as better than a painting of a landscape. It's possible to experience every object, natural or manmade, aesthetically. We do this when we just look at it (or listen to it) without relating it, intellectually or emotionally, to anything outside of itself. When confronted with a natural object, it's an exclusively personal matter whether or not we choose to experience it aesthetically.
The real news in culture in the last three hundred years is the way that the priestly mediation of the artist has become indispensable to the aesthetic experience. The disbursement of "sensitive climate" has become a profession. And modernism has separated the aesthetic experience from edification and harmoniousness, which were previously expected of it.
"Drained of its content, the modern painting has only one significance: it is New. Thus the vanguard audience keeps pressure on the artists to switch styles and manners, to produce new looks, new shivers, new laughs. The passport to the future needs almost daily revalidation." - Thomas Hess, 1964.
Posted by: Susan Emery at November 7, 2007 7:17 AMBlaming Cage for some of the "conneries" (get a French dictionary) perpetrated in his name is like blaming God for about fifteen centuries of war carried out in his (her? its?) name :)
Posted by: Dan Warburton at November 7, 2007 8:27 AMThe disbursement of "sensitive climate" has become a profession.
Can you explain that?
And modernism has separated the aesthetic experience from edification and harmoniousness, which were previously expected of it.
Were you saying, in your first paragraph, that there was an aesthetic doctrine that was prevalent in Germany prior to this "edification/harmoniousness theory" that Cage rediscovered? (Or did I misunderstand what you meant by Cage's "rediscovery.") Would you mind elaborating on that?
Thanks.
Are you saying that
Sorry about my little orphan-coda.
Posted by: walto at November 7, 2007 8:49 AM"Can you explain that?"
The profession being that of those artists who seemingly deny their creative role (by placing the emphasis on the already-existing sounds of the world; or in painting on some other unintentional or natural phenomena) but who simultaneously retain their function as mediator; as "specialist director," as framer. What Cage and those in his wake encourage is that we become "sensitive" to the world around us, in order that we might "experience" it aesthetically. (Nothing new here after German nineteenth-century aesthetics). If what Cage really argued for was pursed fully by himself, his own role as a "name" composer-artist would become obsolete. Yet he was exceptionally careful to not let that happen, and to constantly ensure a close connection between such "radical" art activity and his person.
As for the earlier suggestion that what may not be "new" for the world of fine arts might be new for improvised music (as represented by this micro-group of come-lately "sound artists"): what a disaster it is to separate cultural activity into specialist boxes that have no bearing on each other. They have, of course.
The "post-Cage" machismo referred to earlier is indeed a fame-machismo of a sort. Such artists use their "names" and consequent name-mystique as "musicians" to do nothing more than propose a temporary sensitive climate to "the world." The implication is that one wouldn't be able to do that oneself without their mediation. Which is nonsense. Fully relinquishng the old role of CD-releasing artiste, rather than just hinting at it by, e.g., releasing silent or unopened CDs or some such hopelessly "modernist" gesture: that would be the genuinely radical gesture. In my view, these late hangers-on to American (anti-) art-theory of the late 50s and early 60s have done nothing to go beyond that movement's own initial confusions. (Quite the opposite: they seem oblivious to them and consequently repeat them, perhaps because of a lack of critical attention directed at the music reviewed here from culture at large, e.g, from the New York Times and others--a more public consideration that art was once accorded.) As a result, these "name" musicians dredge up old confusions and errors in the palest of imitations--imitations delighting only equally oblivious "music fans."
"Were you saying, in your first paragraph, that there was an aesthetic doctrine that was prevalent in Germany prior to this "edification/harmoniousness theory" that Cage rediscovered?"
Yes.
P.S It's probably more accurate to refer to a set of commonly held assumptions rather than a "doctrine."
Posted by: Susan Emery at November 7, 2007 9:47 AMDan:
re the wandering "else" (hey, weren't you on a holiday from editing, haha?) - I just meant that, over the years and all the beautiful prose around his figure notwithstanding, I've come to the conclusion that Cage is overestimated. Certainly as a composer (with a few exceptions), a little less as a theorist. In any case I'm not blaming HIM for the attack of the 50-foot con artists - his fault is totally involuntary...
Also, you'd be surprised at how many "names" tell me the same without going public. And I don't mean Glenn Branca.
As a result, these "name" musicians dredge up old confusions and errors in the palest of imitations--imitations delighting only equally oblivious "music fans."
Susan - incredibly well put, this is basically what I was (clumsily) trying to get at.
Massimo - I have to say that I have had an entirely opposite experience- I used to always think Cage was more important for his ideas then his music, but the more music I have heard the more amazing stuff I find there. You are welcome to your taste of course, but there are an awful lot of compositions in his catalog and a lot of music that is intriguing, beautiful and captivating. (I don't really have any interest in your appeal to authority ("names") but I've yet to talk to any improvising musician that I find interesting who aren't fascinated with Cage's legacy. Of course as anecdotal evidence it is as valueless as yours.)
Posted by: Robert at November 7, 2007 10:44 AMRobert - "appeal to authority"? I feel I have more authority by my own experience than asking any improviser or composer to sustain my view. I certainly trust myself more (and, being a multi-instrumentalist improviser myself, you just talked to one who's not so fascinated by Cage's legacy). I agree instead about the valuelessness of anecdotal evidences. I just wanted to point out that Cage is such a holy cow that even "names" are not willing to expose themselves even if they don't like him. That's all. I'm sorry if I didn't express my point more clearly.
Posted by: Massimo Ricci at November 7, 2007 10:52 AMIn any case, after listening to certain beautiful Cage pieces - the OgreOgress releases come to mind just as an example - I reviewed them VERY favourably. But I like to keep the engine of my objectiveness always on.
Posted by: Massimo Ricci at November 7, 2007 11:00 AMFinally - a lot of mediocre composers have written music which sounds "beautiful" and "captivating" (not "intriguing", though...)
Posted by: Massimo Ricci at November 7, 2007 11:11 AM"imitations delighting only equally oblivious "music fans."
Ugh. Well I'm "sorry" for only being an oblivious "music fan". Pray tell what I should be instead so as to be more "enlightened?"
Remembering of course that noone at all in this thread so far has actually made any claims to great "newness" in this music, only that it is a new direction for one area of music to take, why feel the need to make such a violently defensive statement?
Anyway shall we all just give up listening to or making music now then as its all been done before? Following your logic to the lengthy extents that you do I am sure its possible to render every musical endeavour as a pale imitation of something that happened before.
Personally I greatly enjoy the direction that Unami and co seem to have chosen to take their music in. Whilst I am fully aware of its distant influences its a direction that I find thoughtful and inventive, and until I become enlightened somehow and manage to pull myself out of this oblivion I guess I'll have to carry on enjoying it.
Posted by: Richard Pinnell at November 7, 2007 11:12 AMI concur with Richard. This is getting a little bit too intellectual - again that ego thing. Let's just listen and remain (possibly) silent - including yours truly.
Signing off, thanks to everybody!
Thanks for elucidating your post, Susan. Interesting. Could you possibly also point me in the direction of some pre-19th Century writings (Germanic or otherwise) that espouse this older set of commonly held assumptions?
Much appreciated.
Posted by: walto at November 7, 2007 11:43 AM"Fully relinquishng the old role of CD-releasing artiste, rather than just hinting at it by, e.g., releasing silent or unopened CDs or some such hopelessly "modernist" gesture: that would be the genuinely radical gesture."
ah yes I see now.......then they would be really new.......
Posted by: evil twin at November 7, 2007 5:28 PM"ah yes I see now.......then they would be really new......."
No, simply more consistent with their espoused views on art and society.
It's better to omit the issue of "newness" in determining whether something is valuable. The thing is "new" only if it's independently valuable, can't be known to be "new" before it's known to be valuable; and anyway, even if it is valuable, its "newness" is only a matter of when you happen to encounter it. And so raising the issue of "newness" does lead to the notion of "newness" as an independent, primary value, and to resultant confusion.
Incidentally, "newness" can't be identified with the exciting, the shocking, as "new" sometimes seems to be used to refer to; certainly the most exciting, shocking things are not "new" in any sense, but are as old as humanity itself and are well-known to it:religion, obscenity, violence.
Posted by: Susan Emery at November 8, 2007 4:00 AMWalto: "Thanks for elucidating your post, Susan. Interesting. Could you possibly also point me in the direction of some pre-19th Century writings (Germanic or otherwise) that espouse this older set of commonly held assumptions?"
German Romanticism genreally, and the theory of the "sublime" as elucidated by Kant ("nature considered in an aesthetic judgment" - Critique of Judgement, 1790) and Edmund Burke (1756). Others:
Friedrich von Schiller: On Naive and Sentimental Poetry (1795-96); in which he seeks a basis for merging consciousness with the plentitude of the world.
James McPherson: "Irresitible simplicity and nature" (1765)
William Wordsworth: "The passions of men are incorporated with the beautiful and permanent forms of nature" (preface to the Lyrical Ballads of 1800)
Samuel Taylor Coleridge: "Awakening the mind's attention..." (from Biographia Literaria, 1817)
On the basis of music in "Nature":
Jean-Philippe Rameau: Observations on our Musical Instinct and on Its Principle (1754); "To enjoy fully the effects of music, one must be in a state of pure self-abandonment, and to judge it one must rely on the principle by which one is effected: this principle is Nature herself."
Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Essay on the Origins of Language (1781); "The beauty of sounds comes from Nature."
Best wishes.
Posted by: Susan Emery at November 8, 2007 4:37 AMThanks. It seems to me kind of paradoxical that the "isolated, romantic, stressed-out Beethoven-type genius" falls within a tradition that looks to the (naturally occurring) sunset as a paradigm of beauty. Is there a way to resolve that apparent incongruity?
Posted by: walto at November 8, 2007 7:04 AM"The "post-Cage" machismo referred to earlier is indeed a fame-machismo of a sort. Such artists use their "names" and consequent name-mystique as "musicians" to do nothing more than propose a temporary sensitive climate to "the world." The implication is that one wouldn't be able to do that oneself without their mediation. Which is nonsense. Fully relinquishng the old role of CD-releasing artiste, rather than just hinting at it by, e.g., releasing silent or unopened CDs or some such hopelessly "modernist" gesture: that would be the genuinely radical gesture. In my view, these late hangers-on to American (anti-) art-theory of the late 50s and early 60s have done nothing to go beyond that movement's own initial confusions. (Quite the opposite: they seem oblivious to them and consequently repeat them, perhaps because of a lack of critical attention directed at the music reviewed here from culture at large, e.g, from the New York Times and others--a more public consideration that art was once accorded.) As a result, these "name" musicians dredge up old confusions and errors in the palest of imitations--imitations delighting only equally oblivious "music fans.""
"No, simply more consistent with their espoused views on art and society."
what are these espoused views? i don't see any mentioned in this thread.
susan, i think your analysis misses what's really going on. if you think that what these artists are doing is nothing more than "proposing a temporary sensitive climate," than perhaps, but i don't actually see any evidence of that. you are ignoring the fact that what a lot of these artists actually examine is *relationships* - in that view, blank cd's or whatnot tempt to interrogate the relation of artists to consumer/audience, not audience to world. you are right to seize on the role of artist as "mediator," but i think that mediation has to do with relationships- artists choosing to "sensitize" us to particularly interesting material, to frame it or contextualize it in interesting ways. sticking with the duchamp metaphor, he wasn't saying "look how beautiful a urinal is" (it's not); he was questioning the relationships between artist, audience, and materials in an interesting way. you seem to be denying the communicative function of art.
Posted by: jesse kudler at November 8, 2007 1:37 PM"Fully relinquishng the old role of CD-releasing artiste, rather than just hinting at it by, e.g., releasing silent or unopened CDs or some such hopelessly "modernist" gesture: that would be the genuinely radical gesture."
how about releasing a blank cd attributed to nobody as in the top comment?
Posted by: nothing at November 11, 2007 3:44 AM'
Posted by: damon Smith at November 11, 2007 12:47 PMNow there's a bit of post-Cage machismo right there? Watcha doing Damon, quoting a recent Taku Sugimoto score? Or testing Bags' "badass anti spam software" (you've got time to listen to Futatsu while the comment loads)?
Posted by: Dan Warburton at November 11, 2007 10:55 PM"badass anti-spam software"
That's a Namorism that never was much of an aphorism, & esp. dubious now that the Bags mechanical innards are practically antediluvian in age.
But don't let it get you down, Dan. Try to see the positives: There's now time enough for a jaunt down to the pub for a pint betwixt postings.
Posted by: derek at November 12, 2007 6:22 AMActually, if you just renew the page a few seconds after entering the post instead of waiting, it's already there. Maybe this will spare us additional double and triple posts from now on.
Back to Rick Reed's "Hidden Voices" on Trans>parent Radiation. Cheers!
Posted by: Massimo Ricci at November 12, 2007 10:54 AM.................................................. © 2003 - 2006 bagatellen ..................................................