179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
H James Harkins
To:
Date:
Fri, 27 Mar 1998 11:43:36 -0500 (EST)
Subject:
(idm) bucket brigade
Msg-Id:
<Pine.SOL.3.91.980327111856.28734B-100000@godzilla6.acpub.duke.edu>
In-Reply-To:
<19980326005810.474.qmail@hyperreal.org>
Mbox:
idm.9803.gz
quoted 10 lines no it's not. this is much too expansive a subject to write about off the> > no it's not. this is much too expansive a subject to write about off the > > cuff as i am doing here, but i would say that looking at technology as the > > way to solve your problems, in this case, musical, is simply side stepping > > the issue. if you can't 'do it' on a simple setup, what is there to say > > that by simply piling up the gear, piling up the options, piling up the > > sounds, is going to make your music worthwhile? nothing! > > your argument pushed to the extreme says that you don't need an > orchestra, you should be able to say what you want to say with a solo > violin. i refute that.
There is, however, a similar argument that is perfectly sensible, and that is that there are valid things to say musically that can be said with a solo violin (or, can *only* be said with a solo violin). The solo violin won't do it for everything (just as a drum machine+synth combo leaves out a lot of territory), but some amazing things can be done with it. Bach cello suites rock! Also, aren't you going a little far by saying that harmony+melody are completely useless in the 90's? Sounds to me like you're prescribing the one path music must take... and if anything has died in the Western music world in the last 50 years, it's precisely this modernist view--the idea that music progresses along *a* path, that everything that does not move in this direction is regressive, and that it's the artist's job to discern this direction and follow it relentlessly. To paraphrase Boulez, "Anyone who has not felt the necessity of the new serial language is useless." What an idiotic comment! Virtually all this-listy music is illegitimate by those standards. Jon, you're substituting a different language ("sound" instead of "serialism"), but the sentiment is the same, and no less pernicious today than it was then. Plurality! I for one get bored by tracks that have a great sound but don't have a statement to make in terms of pitch material (which includes minimalist statements, too). Hrvatski: were you the one to state that the standard definition of music is "what the composer wants to hear"? I've deleted that digest :( -- anyway, don't forget that this idea (the cult of the genius, basically) is very restricted to a specific geographical area, time and economic class (19th-century and later Europe, especially Germany, and most prominent in bourgeois levels of society). Javanese gamelan is built on totally different social principles--collectivity--no one person originates or owns a "composition"--it's a social action that happens to result in highly organized sound--not "the standard definition" of music, but it's still great music. So it's a non-western culture... there are similar examples in the west too (folk dance musics, for one). I have to point this out because Western bourgeois intellectuals have had a tendency to universalize their own cultural concerns and erase other approaches in other parts of the world and in other classes. Just something to be aware of and careful about. J ________ \ / | "Who's Martha Stewart?" H. James Harkins | "She writes picture books about gracious living." jharkins@acpub.duke.edu | \/ | - from _Jeffrey_ "The sky is big enough to let all the clouds pass." -- Kobai Scott Whitney