|
Ian Pace
|
 |
« Reply #45 on: 12:05:33, 09-06-2007 » |
|
. . . The other all-important factor is the idea of taking a "parameter" to its maximum value and then going further - going "off the page", as graphically illustrated in the text of Unbegrenzt. . . . We should love to know why it is "all-important"! It's all-important to anyone who is involved with studying or performing Stockhausen's music. Now go away and blather about rating composers somewhere else. Are the only people entitled to have an opinion on Stockhausen's music those who are 'involved with studying or performing' it, then? Discourse on Stockhausen is deeply limited by the fact that it tends to emerge either from idolising admirers or from those who totally dismiss it out of hand. I would like to know in what way in particular either Richard or harmonyharmony think that the process of 'taking a "parameter" to its maximum value and then going further - going "off the page"' is worthwhile in terms of the sonic results thus produced. It's too easy to make a fetish out of the means rather than the end - an awful lot of writing about contemporary music has quite reasonably been criticised on such grounds. By the way, despite radically disagreeing with much of what he has to say, I would certainly miss Sydney Grew's postings on various subjects which, if nothing else, serve to set into relief certain complacent assumptions. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
'These acts of keeping politics out of music, however, do not prevent musicology from being a political act . . .they assure that every apolitical act assumes a greater political immediacy' - Philip Bohlman, 'Musicology as a Political Act'
|
|
|
|
John W
|
|
« Reply #46 on: 12:10:06, 09-06-2007 » |
|
Sydney Grew's postings on various subjects which, if nothing else, serve to set into relief certain complacent assumptions.
...... and sometimes they are a relief !  Maybe I'm being harsh then, but topic contributors can decide if the topic has been disturbed - I suppose it has now by me  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
richard barrett
Guest
|
|
« Reply #47 on: 12:15:00, 09-06-2007 » |
|
Are the only people entitled to have an opinion on Stockhausen's music those who are 'involved with studying or performing' it, then? No, it wasn't about opinions, it was about whether one regards the issue in question as "all-important". Discourse on Stockhausen is deeply limited by the fact that it tends to emerge either from idolising admirers or from those who totally dismiss it out of hand. Quite so. Hence, I think, John's suggestion that Grew's attempted derailment be taken elsewhere. I would like to know in what way in particular either Richard or harmonyharmony think that the process of 'taking a "parameter" to its maximum value and then going further - going "off the page"' is worthwhile in terms of the sonic results thus produced. I think you would have to listen to the results and then you either hear it or you don't. By the way, despite radically disagreeing with much of what he has to say, I would certainly miss Sydney Grew's postings on various subjects which, if nothing else, serve to set into relief certain complacent assumptions.
Good for you! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Pace
|
|
« Reply #48 on: 12:22:03, 09-06-2007 » |
|
Stockhausen's satorial sense may not immediately seem directly relevant to matters, but when one considers images like that below, from a production Montag aus Licht, one might think otherwise...   |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
'These acts of keeping politics out of music, however, do not prevent musicology from being a political act . . .they assure that every apolitical act assumes a greater political immediacy' - Philip Bohlman, 'Musicology as a Political Act'
|
|
|
|
Biroc
|
|
« Reply #49 on: 12:22:59, 09-06-2007 » |
|
That was the chamber-orchestra version, wasn't it? (I was there too) Yes, Richard. The Dutch Radio Chamber Orchestra was conducted by Peter Eötvös. Stockhausen was also present. One of my first concerts in the Concertgebouw and one of my first concerts devoted to contemporary music. Later it was televised. I would like to have that performance on a DVD. I remember seeing myself sitting in the audience.  I think I have that on...DVD. Might be a different performance and I can't check at the mo since it's in work...I'll look on Monday! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Believe nothing they say, they're not Biroc's kind."
|
|
|
|
richard barrett
Guest
|
|
« Reply #50 on: 12:24:22, 09-06-2007 » |
|
I think I have that on...DVD. Might be a different performance and I can't check at the mo since it's in work...I'll look on Monday!
I've always liked you, Biroc, I don't care what anyone says. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
pim_derks
|
|
« Reply #51 on: 12:25:34, 09-06-2007 » |
|
I think I have that on...DVD. Might be a different performance and I can't check at the mo since it's in work...I'll look on Monday!
Many thanks, Biroc.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"People hate anything well made. It gives them a guilty conscience." John Betjeman
|
|
|
|
Ian Pace
|
|
« Reply #52 on: 12:26:26, 09-06-2007 » |
|
Are the only people entitled to have an opinion on Stockhausen's music those who are 'involved with studying or performing' it, then? No, it wasn't about opinions, it was about whether one regards the issue in question as "all-important". A perfectly reasonable question to ask - why do you think it is? Discourse on Stockhausen is deeply limited by the fact that it tends to emerge either from idolising admirers or from those who totally dismiss it out of hand. Quite so. Hence, I think, John's suggestion that Grew's attempted derailment be taken elsewhere. Just a contrary opinion - a dismissive one, yes, but not necessarily any worse than those which discuss Stockhausen's work more in terms of his own conceptions than any wider perspective. I would like to know in what way in particular either Richard or harmonyharmony think that the process of 'taking a "parameter" to its maximum value and then going further - going "off the page"' is worthwhile in terms of the sonic results thus produced. I think you would have to listen to the results and then you either hear it or you don't. So, if it is 'all-important', how do you think it is manifested in the results, then? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
'These acts of keeping politics out of music, however, do not prevent musicology from being a political act . . .they assure that every apolitical act assumes a greater political immediacy' - Philip Bohlman, 'Musicology as a Political Act'
|
|
|
|
Ian Pace
|
|
« Reply #53 on: 12:35:05, 09-06-2007 » |
|
One could say the same about posts on message boards perhaps, that while some of us attempt to construct positively, others revel in disturbance and chicanery. That is, I'm afraid I've found, a common 'group think' argument that gets presented on message boards - those who basically adhere to underlying assumptions of the group contribute something 'positive', whereas those who don't are supposedly just trying to be disruptive. It's not the case at all. In the vastly larger world outside of that of Stockhausen admirers (in which category I basically count myself), an awful lot of people ask whether this music is more about technical procedures and esoteric abstraction (sometimes using rather blunter language than I'm doing ) rather than about sounds, emotions, thoughts, etc. The fact that so much discourse about Stockhausen (and other composers) deals so obsessively with how the pieces are created or performed, rather than what the results amount to, only serves to reinforce such preconceptions. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
'These acts of keeping politics out of music, however, do not prevent musicology from being a political act . . .they assure that every apolitical act assumes a greater political immediacy' - Philip Bohlman, 'Musicology as a Political Act'
|
|
|
|
George Garnett
|
|
« Reply #54 on: 12:48:27, 09-06-2007 » |
|
I would like to have that performance on a DVD. I remember seeing myself sitting in the audience. A DVD which managed to capture Biroc having a Stockhausen-inspired out-of-body experience would be of even greater interest  . |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Biroc
|
|
« Reply #55 on: 12:54:37, 09-06-2007 » |
|
I would like to have that performance on a DVD. I remember seeing myself sitting in the audience. A DVD which managed to capture Biroc having a Stockhausen-inspired out-of-body experience would be of even greater interest . It was Pim who was at the gig, not me (it's Pim's quote!)... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Believe nothing they say, they're not Biroc's kind."
|
|
|
|
richard barrett
Guest
|
|
« Reply #56 on: 13:27:33, 09-06-2007 » |
|
Are the only people entitled to have an opinion on Stockhausen's music those who are 'involved with studying or performing' it, then? No, it wasn't about opinions, it was about whether one regards the issue in question as "all-important". A perfectly reasonable question to ask - why do you think it is? I think that for anyone who's involved in studying or performing Stockhausen's work, and for many others too, it's "all-important" to realise that (a) his concept of serial composition is central to the thinking behind the music whether it contains any traditional notation or not, and that (b) this concept crucially embraces the idea of going outside, of "transcending", whatever systematic framework is in operation. This is just to put in slightly different words something I posted earlier. As to if and where these matters manifest themselves, I think they do so all over the music. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Pace
|
|
« Reply #57 on: 13:33:36, 09-06-2007 » |
|
I think that for anyone who's involved in studying or performing Stockhausen's work, and for many others too, it's "all-important" to realise that (a) his concept of serial composition is central to the thinking behind the music whether it contains any traditional notation or not, and that (b) this concept crucially embraces the idea of going outside, of "transcending", whatever systematic framework is in operation. This is just to put in slightly different words something I posted earlier. As to if and where these matters manifest themselves, I think they do so all over the music.
Yes, but that's all about the ideas and techniques behind the pieces, rather than the results (as the earlier post was) - what I'm asking is in what way you feel these ideas translate into sound (hopefully in a such a way as to make the pieces somehow meaningful to those without prior knowledge, or necessarily an interest, in the compositional techniques or Stockhausen's own eccentric conceptions?). What exactly does '"transcending" a systematic framework' mean in terms of what people can hear? And how do the particular serial techniques he employs produce results -either on a momentary or temporally determined level - markedly distinct from those that might be obtained by other means? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
'These acts of keeping politics out of music, however, do not prevent musicology from being a political act . . .they assure that every apolitical act assumes a greater political immediacy' - Philip Bohlman, 'Musicology as a Political Act'
|
|
|
|
richard barrett
Guest
|
|
« Reply #58 on: 13:39:29, 09-06-2007 » |
|
I'm afraid I've found Don't you mean "we"? an awful lot of people ask whether this music is more about technical procedures and esoteric abstraction (sometimes using rather blunter language than I'm doing ) rather than about sounds, emotions, thoughts, etc. The fact that so much discourse about Stockhausen (and other composers) deals so obsessively with how the pieces are created or performed, rather than what the results amount to, only serves to reinforce such preconceptions. A lot of it being based on what Stockhausen himself preferred to discuss, which in a wider perspective can easily be seen as a reaction against the kind of musical discourse the postwar avant-garde generation explicitly rejected (for good reasons as well as less good ones). I think that for anyone who's involved in studying or performing Stockhausen's work, and for many others too, it's "all-important" to realise that (a) his concept of serial composition is central to the thinking behind the music whether it contains any traditional notation or not, and that (b) this concept crucially embraces the idea of going outside, of "transcending", whatever systematic framework is in operation. This is just to put in slightly different words something I posted earlier. As to if and where these matters manifest themselves, I think they do so all over the music.
Yes, but that's all about the ideas and techniques behind the pieces, rather than the results (as the earlier post was) - what I'm asking is in what way you feel these ideas translate into sound (hopefully in a such a way as to make the pieces somehow meaningful to those without prior knowledge, or necessarily an interest, in the compositional techniques or Stockhausen's own eccentric conceptions?). What exactly does '"transcending" a systematic framework' mean in terms of what people can hear? And how do the particular serial techniques he employs produce results -either on a momentary or temporally determined level - markedly distinct from those that might be obtained by other means? I cited a number of very clearly audible examples of this "overstepping" in an earlier post, as well as saying in the above-quoted one that both these and the systematic framework manifest themselves audibly all over the music. Maybe not quite in every corner of every piece, but if anyone has made a case for a generalised conception of seriality being a consistently audible component of the music, it's Stockhausen. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Pace
|
|
« Reply #59 on: 13:41:31, 09-06-2007 » |
|
I cited a number of very clearly audible examples of this "overstepping" in an earlier post, as well as saying in the above-quoted one that both these and the systematic framework manifest themselves audibly all over the music. Yes, but I'm asking how? Just to assert that these things are audible tells very little. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
'These acts of keeping politics out of music, however, do not prevent musicology from being a political act . . .they assure that every apolitical act assumes a greater political immediacy' - Philip Bohlman, 'Musicology as a Political Act'
|
|
|
|
