Sonatas and Interludes I-IV for prepared piano
Music of Changes, books 1-4
and on this external link, please listen to Cage's String Quartet in Four Parts.
- I. Quietly Flowing Along
- II. Slowly Rocking
- III. Nearly Stationary
- IV. Quodlibet
The future of music: Credo
Experimental Music: Doctrine
How to Improve the World (You Will Only Make Matters Worse)
If you have time, sample some of the copious Cage offerings on the wonderful website www.ubu.com.
Here is an entertaining YouTube clip that has been popular recently, of John Cage appearing on the 1950s television show "I've Got a Secret," performing his composition Water Walk.
As before, comment on this post with your thoughts and opinions. These comments count as part of class participation - they are not optional!
13 comments:
I have really enjoyed listening to the Cage works and reading what he has to say. I am particularly impressed with his Credo on the future of music. How ahead of his time! But I also wonder what he thought of the future of music AFTER the advance of electronic music? When the debate about noise vs. musical sounds ended (or evolved into something else, as the "disagreement between dissonance consonance" evolved into the disagreement between noise and musical sounds) what did he think it would evolve INTO? What did he think would happen next?
I also love reading his diary entry "How to Improve the World (You Will Only Make Matters Worse)." At times brilliant and at times utterly undecipherable (to me), I love his stream-of-consciousness thoughts with the parenthetical rebuttals (the conscience? the rational part of the mind?). It's as if Cage wanted to change the world but there was a part of him that said it was a waste of time and there was nothing he could do.
Lastly, in listening to his pieces, I think I like Cage's music because (in my opinion) he leaves so much to the listener's imagination. It's like he's not telling you how to feel or respond but rather allowing you to listen and determine on your own how you think and feel and react to a piece. His use of silence is fantastic; not many composers can insert long stretches of silence (rests) and keep the piece feeling like it has momentum. I don't know how Cage does this, but I feel momentum even in the silences, and I have no idea why.
I have always thoroughly liked John Cage's music, or silence, for that matter. :) Critics, Critics, Critics!
What hit me the most about listening to the string quartet was the almost ironic hints of tonalism. As we discussed in class, Cage's weakness was tonalism, but to my ear, this piece brinks on that very concept to a certain extent. When the strings hit a certain "set" or "chord" for this matter, it had a very organized sound to me, similar to many recent impressionistic pieces.
What else I enjoy about Cage is his use of everyday items to create music. I think this concept is the core of who he is as a musician. He seemed to want to be different. He wanted to find a means in which to distinguish himself differently as compared to the other artists of his era. I think he does this extremely beautifully in his piece 4'33''.
4'33'' is unique in that the piece is always different. Oddly enough, I use this concept in my middle school music appreciation course. I spend a period outside with my students in silence and ask them to close their eyes and simply listen to what is around them. It is a great way to get young students to understand the concept of "active" listening. It is interesting to see what the kids come up with.
Cage's diary entry was quite confusing for me. I understand his use of the chance missostic sp.? concept, but still find it difficult to interpret his real message. However, it is extremely poetic and artistic.
Although I enjoy the experience that is John Cage, it is difficult for me to wholly grasp or embrace his compositions or more importantly, his philosophy and process behind his composing. Initially, I was close to shocked when we watched the YouTube video of Water Walk and he said he believes that the production of any sound is music. This notion contradicts what I have studied for so many years: music is NOT noise; rather it is the culmination of careful expression and thought.
If I am correct in concluding that his idea that the production of noise is music is one of the governing philosophies behind his compositions, then I can appreciate why he was so controversial and why conventional musicians of the time gave him so much flak. According to Cage, every single person on Earth is performing apparently high quality noise/music every second of their lives, since we all either make noise or live without noise and sit in silence. Such an idea is ridiculous to me, as I can safely say that a professional trumpet player or violinist, etc is more highly skilled at performing and expressing music than someone with no musical background brushing their teeth…but in Cage’s mind they are apparently on the same plane.
All that being said, however, I can see in my own words that my mind and ear has been trained a certain way and that anything out of the ordinary classical box would be offensive to my ear. This is probably Cage’s whole point: although the current manner of expressing and listening to music may be familiar and regarded as the conventional thought, another unfamiliar music-making process shouldn’t be discounted. If the whole creative world thought alike and inside the same box, there would be no progression, right? The recording of his lecture at Harvard gave me a bit of insight and understanding into his compositional process: the immediate sound may not make logical sense—and in fact is probably unimportant—but it is the overall observation and meaning that can be gained only when one steps back that is significant.
I can honestly say that reading Cage has had an enormous impact on the way that I think about music and that Cage's music has been formative for me as a musician in many ways. My first year as an undergrad, my music theory class was given an assignment to go out on campus somewhere and listen intently for some length of time. Obviously, this exercise was modeled after 4'33" and it was such a powerful, life-changing experience for me. My ears really opened up to the whole world and I have remained a very active listener ever since. So Cage's music and ideas have really affected the way that I interact with sounds and how I pay attention to them as a listener.
I have always really liked the Sonatas and Interludes and String Quartet in Four Parts. The latter piece reminds me of renaissance music in some ways, mainly in the way the melodic lines move and where the accents or pauses happen in relation to the rhythmic groupings. The pieces for prepared piano create such a great sound world, such unique timbres filled with rhythmic vitality. The one thing I perhaps admire most about Cage's earlier music (and it was mentioned today in class) is the rhythm. Cage's Living Room Music is another piece that I really enjoy for its wonderful rhythms.
This is kind of off-topic, but can anyone image something analogous to Cage's TV performance happening today? I'm amazed at how much has changed in the media. I doubt that any composer of experimental music living today could do something like that on television - or even radio! - anymore, which is sad. If there is one thing that has contributed to the public misunderstanding and rejection of contemporary music, then it is lack of exposure. If people do not have regular contact with new music (as they do with traditional and pop music), if it's not available for them to experience, then how else are they supposed to develop any kind of understanding or appreciation for what composers are creating now?
Of all the music that we have listened to thus far, I enjoy Cage's music the most. I like the rhythmic patterns he chooses in his compositions. In all of today's listening examples, I prefer the second movement of Sonatas and Interludes and String Quartet in Four Parts called "Slowly Rocking." The combinations he composed work so well together and are quite pleasing to my ear.
Many of you have commented on 4'33" and your experiences listening in school or with your students. I use a similar lesson with my first graders where we go on a listening walk and hear all the sounds around us. I try to get my students to really open up their ears and listen. It's amazing to see their surprise by the wide variety of sounds they can hear when they stop and listen.
I greatly admire Cage's philosophy behind this piece. I was unaware before class today that he actually composed the rhythms deliberately. I like how Cage was not concerned with public opinion and wrote as he pleased.
Even though I don't favor all of the instrumentation and sounds in his pieces, I want to listen more for the sake of the rhythm combinations and deliberate silences he adds. I find Cage's use of sounds and silences captivating.
Upon listening to Cage's String Quartet in Four Parts, I am immediately struck by the beauty of the sound world he creates. Beauty would usually not be the first characteristic that comes to mind with Cage's music. (For instance, I personally do not find this in his Music of Changes.) In the Quartet, his predetermined pitch material not only allows for but also features consonant intervals, and thus the end result has an organized rather than a random sound to my ear. As radical (for 1950) as his compositional procedures may have been, the resulting sound world of this piece is in fact easily approachable.
Two particular musical features that intrigue me: I am interested in how conjunct, melodic lines emerge out of Cage's texture. Even though each individual instrumental line is leaping widely, another instrument often leaps in the opposite direction. Thus in the combined texture smoothly flowing melodic lines appear.
Likewise, in the final movement, "Quodlibet," some of these flowing melodic lines resemble folk songs. I wonder if Cage is actually quoting pre-existing melodies here. Given the movement title, one would expect that.
This was my first exposure to Cage's Quartet. I understand that it is an early work, and perhaps not wholly representative of his mature style, but it has expanded my conception of Cage's range as a composer.
I have great hopes for the future of music - the teachers here sound like they're doing a great job! Nobody ever had me listen to 4'33" when I was a kid.
David's comments on Credo are well taken; it is an astonishingly prophetic piece. I'm not sure if Cage knew what would happen after the advance of electronics - to my mind, electronic music is like computers now in everyday life, deeply embedded in our experience of the world, even if we don't realize it. Ubiquitous and sometimes invisible.
I'm impressed some of you already know the String Quartet, which is still one of my favorite pieces by him; yes, Cage does create melodies in the piece via a hocket technique, in which individual notes from each instrument are combined to make conjunct lines, not unlike the last movement of Tchaikovsky 6 (or African music).
I think there is something distinctly "American" about Cage. He shares that same maverick explorer quality with Ives and Cowell in that he expanded the realm of what was possible and usable sound.
I remember reading an article years ago that talked about the relationship between Cage's music (in particular 4'33")and Rauschenberg's white paintings. Both works require a listener/viewer to complete the artistic process.
Another important aspect of Cage, especially in his writings, is that he created a legacy for the next generation of American composers to be daring in their compositional process and to have the freedom to react to the serialism that was being taught in the universities during the 1950's and 1960's.
After hearing some cage during my undergraduate, it is refreshing to learn how and why he composed, or organized, as he did. 4’33” is a very powerful tool in the classroom, as is his use of chance operations. I use this as a method of describing how no 2 performances are never and can never be the same.
Cage furthers this argument in his doctrine article, which I enjoyed. I particularly liked his rebuttals of the “slowwitted” student who seeks to find purpose in his writings, to which Cage replies “no purpose-sounds” and “It’s not a question of having anything to say”.
I do wonder how Cage feels/felt about having his music recorded. Doesn’t this go against his whole concept of chance operations in sound? Does not a recording of such a piece facilitate the direct and specific repetition of those sounds? This leaves nothing (at least in the recording) to chance.
With Cage, I have always been intrigued by the idea of prepared piano, how one instrument could sound like so many various sounds and so little like piano! Listening to the "Sonatas and Interludes" I was reminded of gamelan music. Regardless of that, I believe the sound of the instrument provides quite a different mood, for me sometimes dark. I will show my lack of knowledge by asking is he the first to develop prepared piano? Did anyone else use it?
In my 5th grade general music class this past year I very briefly talked about Cage and prepared piano. Now that I have heard the String Quartet in Four Parts, I'd like to incorporate this somehow in my lessons too. I really like the first movement (Quietly Flowing Along). His method of composition for this piece was new for me, but I like the results in the first movement.
I was a little confused by the Experimental music: Doctrine article. I could not figure out if he was describing his music using the term experimental or whether he was trying to avoid that terminology all together. The last paragraph before the question/answer section, while I thought would help me understand the intent, only proved to confuse me further.
What can I say about John Cage? Before this course, I was really only familiar with 4'33". I had heard examples in 20th century music in undergrad, but never really took the time to learn his music. Listening to these other pieces by Cage has really opened my ears to his music. I almost hesitate to say it, but I really enjoyed the Sonatas and Interludes for Prepared Piano. I love the tones and colors he creates with this instrument. And although I was quickly losing interest during the Doctirne, I was brought back when I started reading "How to Improve the World (You Will Only Make Matters Worse). His Doctrine was slightly over my head, and I am not ashamed to admit that. I simply didn't get it. The diary entry, however, spoke to me in certain places. I belive someone used the term stream of consciousness in a previous post-I love it. There is that underlying cynicism to this writing that I just love. It is almost like our collective grain of salt to take with us when we view the world.
Reading "How to Improve the World" - two passages caught my attention:
***************************
1). IMAGE IS NO LONGER STREAM FALLING OVER ROCKS, GETTING FROM ORIGINAL TO FINAL PLACE; IT'S AS TENNEY EXPLAINED: A VIBRATING
COMPLEX, ANY ADDITION OR SUBTRACTION OF COMPONENT(S), REGARDLESS OF APPARENT POSITION(S) IN THE TOTAL SYSTEM, PRODUCING ALTERATION, A DIFFERENT MUSIC.
2). I opened the door of the car, picked up my attache case and everything in it fell out on the grass and the gutter. His comment: Something memorable always happens.
***************************
These passages made me seriously consider how we determine the "value" of music. Is the quality of one work measured only with respect to the vast realm of existing works, critical opinions, and established conventions from which it originated - or is there a way to appraise music with respect to some universally applicable standard? Personally, I believe that one person's appraisal of musical quality is essentially meaningless because it is only measured in relationship to one confined system. In this sense, it is indeed true that "Something memorable always happens." Works are memorable or noteworthy not because of their relationship to a universal whole or, as Cage puts it "the TOTAL system" - but because they compare favorably against music that is already known to exist. Masterpieces are thus necessitated; there will always be a worst and a best, a highest and a lowest, regardless of the overall position of the system under consideration. It is a "masterpiece" because it is the best we know of, but is that good enough? Can our system of musical thought be broadened, or merely cosmetically altered?
This leads to the perhaps illusionary notion of musical progress. Babbitt's article has had me wondering if music is a field that can be said to be "going somewhere" in the sense that science is always going somewhere; producing insights and innovations that become progressively richer and more useful. I think Cage was looking for a new way to approach music - an approach that transcended the cyclical tides of fashion and good taste, in an order to progress things to the next level. This was arguably the purpose of Music of Changes. He felt that the only way to remove arbitrary notions of musical quality was to remove his own sensibilities from the equation. The results may not be pleasant to my ear, but my ear is conditioned by centuries of Western convention. Is this enough to discount his work entirely?
Ahhh John Cage. I don't understand a lick of what he is composing, however, I really enjoy listening to his lectures and reading his articles. He has a way about him that is very calming, which is completely opposite what one would expect from listening to his music. I really appreciate his side of the noise vs. music sounds debate. Though I don't understand it and have a hard time analyzing it without guidance, I do believe that anything that is sound, can be music. As I stated before, Cage has a calming sense about him that I really appreciate. I think that he chooses his words wisely and doesn't speak without knowing full well what he is talking about. He also makes no apologies for his beliefs and compositions, however, he also respects the listener enough to know that they might not understand or simply enjoy what he has done. To him it seems to be purely for his own enjoyment and creative outlet.
Post a Comment