Please read Alex Ross's article, "Ghost Sonata: Adorno and German music." Also read the Introduction to Set Theory, distributed in class.
Listen to Boulez, Structures 1a and Messiaen, Mode de valeurs et d'intensités, in the online listening.
Finally, please comment on this post, introducing yourself to the rest of the class, and sharing any thoughts you have on these two short pieces. In your introduction, please include your specialization, what degree you're pursuing, and what you hope to gain from this course.
Here is the Introduction to Set Theory (pdf) that we discussed in class - sorry I forgot to print it out!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Hello, my name is Josh Hahn. I am a first year summers only MME student. My area of focus is Music Education. I teach 6-12 band at Orion schools, which is a rural suburb of the Quad Cities in Illinois. My most proficient instrument is the trumpet. I registered for this course due to my interest in music theory. Theory was a strength of mine in undergrad, and since we did not cover much of this later music, I thought it would be both interesting and challenging for me.
The "Ghost Sonata" article was extremely interesting. It opened my eyes to the Adornian world. Adorno's views were very negative and defeatist, but in a strange way understandingly so. He seemed to want to take on the ever-changing world that was falling under the commercialist music spell. Many times have I made a comment to musical friends that it is a shame at how many students lack the listening of "decent" music. With our everyday music now filled with all of the "Ushers". But, at the end of the article, something resounded that made a lot of sense to me. Like Mozart's father implied, and that in which even Beethoven took heed to, was that music should include something that is attainable for everyone. I admired Beethoven's approach, in that he composed pieces that stretched the imagination, but stayed true to his audiences current nature and tendencies.
The Ligeti article on the other hand was a little difficult to take a hold of. I am still under the "tonal" spell in that I tend to enjoy tonal music over the newer, less tonal medium that has emerged over the last 60 years. Now, I am sure this is due to the fact that I have little experience with these newer styles of music. After reading this article, I thought....science. When I look at this type of music, and an analysis of it, it looks like a large scientific experiment. I say this in that the composer creates this framework, before it is ever composed, and then creates the piece on this framework as if to prove a musical idea valid or not valid. This is comparative to a scientist who develops his/her hypothesis, and then attempts to prove its validity either way. But, then again, this is coming from a mere listener, and not an educated composer.
My name is Kent Conrad and I am finishing my doctorate in Vocal Accompanying this year. For the sake of the prelims and because it has been a number of years since I have analyzed twentieth-century music, I am taking this course.
I had read the "Ghost Sonata" article when it first appeared in the "New Yorker" magazine. My reaction to the article remains the same. The overwhelming sense of guilt that Germany continues to experience as a result of the Holocaust has permeated not only music, but other art forms, particulary film and literature. I do not subscribe to an aesthetic of deliberate ugliness and my reaction when listening to a lot of this post WWII German music is that it would serve well as a soundtrack for a new movie version of Orwell's "1984".
Of the two listening examples, I was drawn more to the Messiaen. Even though it was an experiment in serializing other aspects of music besides pitch, it still had to my ears Messiaen's signature sense of tone color. The mode for the upper register (what was called the bell register in class) actually was more reminiscent of bird song, a particular interest of Messiaen's that is found in many of his other works. Also the use of the three modes, occupying three registers, reminded me of gamelan music in which there is a stratification of registers and slower rhythmic events tend to happen in the lowest register. The reoccuring low C# sounded like a low gong that served to establish structural points throughout the piece.
Hello.
My name is Amanda Moloney. I am in my second summer of the MME program. I currently teach 5th-12th grade band and high school choir. My principal instrument is the trumpet. I registered for this class simply because it met a requirement for my degree and it worked in my schedule. I will say, however, that I think I will enjoy this course. I was not always the strongest in music theory during undergrad, (and its been a few years since I've taken a theory course) but I am optimistic!
I certainly do not have an ear for 20th century music, but it is like I tell my students-you don't have to like it, but it is important that you understand and appreciate it. I think that my appreciation will grow throughout this course. I enjoy reading about WHY certain pieces are composed (much like the information in the article we read today) as well as the process. I think this class will help me learn to further appreciate post WWII music.
Hi! My name is Bobbi Mielcarski and I am in my second summer of the summers-only MME program. I teach K-6 general music and 5th grade band. From this course I hope to gain a better ability to "truly listen" and understand the music from the time periods covered in class.
Of the two pieces, I found the Messiaen piece easier to decipher through listening. While using various modes to compose the piece, it sounded like ideas returned throughout, which made it feel like something I could relate to - more familiar. The Boulez piece, while compositionally based more on structure, sounded less structured in my opinion.
Hey, I'm Jack Marquardt. I just finished at Oberlin, where I majored in Clarinet Performance, and I will be heading to LA in the fall to start my masters in Clarinet at the University of Southern California. I played a lot of new music while at Oberlin, and have really grown to appreciate it. I hope to gain some new insight into post WWII music with this course. The theoretical insight has always helped me create much more creative and exciting performances.
In regards to the Ross article, I found it very interesting. It brought to mind a conversation I had with a teacher at Oberlin who thought that Americans cannot bring themselves to accept Modernist music outside of academia because there has not been a major war fought on our soil in recent memory. The absence of an event on the scale of the Holocaust or Hiroshima/Nagasaki cannot give us the inspiration that inspired European Modernists. Perhaps the music of populists like Ewazen, Theofanidis, Higdon and even Corigliano is a result of the American capitalist vapid consumerism that Ross briefly touches on in his article. Not that I find myself preferring one or the other, but I find how differently Americans and Europeans view new music fascinating.
I really enjoyed the Messiaen piece today, as Kent pointed out below, I thought it was experimental and had took serialism a step further, while still having the essential Messiaen sound, I found the 1st row very reminiscent of the bird calls in his quartet for the end of time and many other works. I had to wonder though how fair it is to a performer to exert that much control. There is no room for rubati due to the rhythmic constraints and how carefully planned out it is, and every note has its own dynamic and articulation! There really isn’t for interpretation, except maybe for sound colors. It seems to as if a MIDI could give the most convincing performance, or at least get the formal structure of the piece across the best, which seems to be the aim of the piece.
My name is Taylor and I'm working on a master's in composition. I compose music that is influenced by jazz and rock in vocabulary or material but is modernist in structure. In fact, Adorno's essay "Vers une musique informelle" has been very influential on my compositional ideas even though I work with pop music materials.
Thus, I was intrigued by Ross's opinion of Adorno - and I think that it is largely accurate - but wanted more on Adorno's later writings, the writings in which he occasionally put forward a positive thought. The above essay on informal music is unique in Adorno's writings because he sketches a way out of the "culdesac of theory;" Adorno even ventures to say what an informal music should be instead of what it should not be.
In many ways, I think that Boulez's Structures represents a musical manifestation of Adorno's negative dialectics. Back in 1951, Boulez's radical compositional method served to define that piece in terms of what it was not as much as, if not more than, what it was. It's as if Boulez took Adorno's modern-music-as-negation to the extreme and tried to negate himself as composer.
Ironically, Adorno criticized integral serialism for its "abdication of mind," the automatism that Ligeti identified in his analysis of Structures. It is arguably an important piece, a revolutionary piece, but that doesn't make it a good piece per se. Over 50 years later, we hear the technique as young and crude; but it was a good first try!
However, at the time, Boulez's piece staked out new territory for what music could be and that is where its value lies. Structures is not expressive in the traditional sense, and yet it expresses a very powerful concept about musical possibility: music is nothing but what we make it. Boulez's composition, by virtue of being un-expressive, expresses a revolutionary idea about what music is and that is the essence of negative dialectics.
Interesting comments so far - keep them rolling in! Kent, I'm excited that you've read Ross before. His blog, therestisnoise.com, is consistently interesting.
Keep in mind that everyone has an agenda, including Boulez (obviously), Ross, and me (though I'm trying to be objective). Many of my friends and colleagues are irritated by Ross' apparent lack of respect for the high modernist tradition, although I think much of what he says is fair.
And everyone is coming from different backgrounds, as some of you have pointed out. A couple of weeks ago I had an interesting experience when the ISYM high school orchestra played my piece The Floating World, in which techno, pounding rhythms obliterate orchestral textures - a piece partly inspired by Radiohead's song 2+2=5. The students thought it was extremely weird and experimental. I told them they should go check out Stockhausen.
Hi guys,
My name is David Roth. This is my third summer in the MME program. I am a high school band director in Kennesaw, GA (Kennesaw Mountain High School), and my primary instrument is the clarinet.
I am taking this class because I know that 20th century music is a weakness of mine (in terms of familiarity) and the feeling is mutual, although I hope that through understanding and analysis I will develop a greater appreciation for the post-WWII compositions we will be studying.
I am fascinated by the math and the science involved in serialism and love to pick apart pieces like these and watch the notes jump out like pieces of a puzzle (almost like how the anagrams jump out at Tom Hanks' character in "The DaVinci Code.")
I thoroughly enjoyed the Ross article on Adorno, who it seems was passionate and brilliant, if also quite controversial! For me, today's lecture and subsequent readings/listenings has been about opening my mind, especially when viewing the music of Schoenberg, et. al, as music written in defiance of Nazi Germany and the Romantic and Neo-Classical music of the time. I had never really thought about the history of atonal and serial music, and my only experience with it (hooray Sophomore Theory) was simply a crash course in what is was, not WHY or WHEN. I am fascinated by the readings and music so far-- Messiaen's piece is easier to listen to for me, but I am somewhat familiar with his "Quartet for the End of Time" from undergrad, so maybe there is comfort in familiarity?
Hi everyone, my name is Jennifer Wetzel. This is my first summer in the MME program. I am a music educator and currently teach preK-3rd grade general music and 4th grade beginning band in Mokena, IL. Band is my area of specialty, and my principal instrument is the clarinet. I also have a special interest in early childhood music and music development for young children.
I am looking forward to the topics we will be studying in this course and hope it will open up my mind to music of the post WWII time period. I enjoy the math part of music theory and am excited to delve in to a greater extent than I covered in my undergrad degree.
I prefer the Boulez piece. The section from the middle to the end was particularly enjoyable. I like the dynamic contrasts and phrasing. The beginning was a bit difficult for me to get past with the differences in register. It's much like the comment that was made in class about perfect structure and chaos and how they can become very much alike. The beginning of this piece is very random and chaotic. It seems to fall into more of a pattern and sense of calmness as the piece continues throughout the ending.
Hello,my name is Larisa Chasanov.
I'm working on a Master degree in Vocal Accompanying.I'm taking this course because of the requirements.Also,I hope to learn and read about such interesting vews as in Ross article.
I played a few pieces by Messiaen-and this is my all experience with this part of music.
I don't really believe that I'll grow to love it but maybe understand and be able to hear something in it (more, than I do now).
Two quotations from the article-
Schoenberg’s "If it is art, it is not for all, and if it is for all, it is not art."
and Rosse's
"If composers are to survive, they must learn the art of compromise".
Somewhere in between there is a territory where some music lover like myself will find a new music to love and to want to hear more than once.
Sorry for my bad English.(it,'s my first writing in English)
My name is Rebecca Cutler. I am in my third Summer in the MMEd program. For two years, I taught 4-8 grade band in the Joliet Public Schools, and now have taken a couple of years off from teaching in the schools to raise a daughter that was born on April 7th! We now live in the Rockford area, where my fiance teaches band at Hononegah High School in Rockton, Illinois. On the side, I am creating an ever growing private lesson studio for beginning band and orchestra students of all instruments and also more advanced students in piano and flute. I decided to take this class because I have never been a natural at music theory so I'm hoping that new methods and ideas might trigger something. I always envied the people who could just look at a chord and know what it was immediately but I never could, it always took me a second. So I might be slower to answer, but I appreciate everyone's patience, and if you have any ideas or tricks that you think might help, I'm very open to help.
The article has really made me view theory in it's traditional form differently. The author seems to be somewhat critical of the composers that I am used to hearing, studying, and that are known as historically outstanding composers. I'm very excited to learn more about the analytical process of some of the 20th century music and how it can literally be put together by a series of numbers.
Hello, this is Aaron Ziegel. I am starting my second year in the PhD musicology program. I do work with American music (American Romanticism especially), American Popular Song/Tin Pan Alley composers, and 18th-century keyboard sonatas.
I have not had any post-tonal theory since my undergrad sophomore year. I hope that by taking this course I will gain a better listening appreciation for some styles of modern music that I generally dislike listening to.
Regarding the Ross article, I was grateful for his more honest appraisal of Adorno's strengths and weaknesses. In musicology especially, all too often Adorno is cited as justification for almost any point of view, as if it is a necessity to cite him. It is almost like brainwashing (as some writers like Richard Taruskin have suggested), so I found Ross's stance refreshing.
(By the way, Alex Ross came to give at talk at U of Cincinnati, while I was finishing my Masters there. It was fun to hear him in person after reading many of his articles.)
Regarding the listening: While I am indeed fascinated by the compositional methods behind these works, for me, this interest does not translate into an enjoyable listening experience. As Kent pointed out, Messiaen's use of registers does at least sound like his style. And despite the ultimate in ordering in the Boulez, to my ear that piece will always sound random. Even though he chose the register for the pitches, I do not feel that he treated piano color with enough sensitivity to redeem his piece. At least Boulez recognized that it was a compositional dead end.
My name is Tom Miller, I am a 2nd- year MME Student. I teach grades 4-8 Band and orchestra in the Decatur Public Schools in Decatur, UL. I enrolled primarily because this fulfilled a degree requirement, but also because I enjoyed Music Theory as an Undergrad and do have a genuine interest in it.
Although, I have not read any Adorno, I think (hope) that Ross gave a somewhat accurate description of his writing and perception of music. His particular quote regarding Adorno as being raised in the time when Mahler and Strauss were gods, and living until Sinatra and the Beatles took their place was catchy. I sometimes feel the same way as an adult. Don't we all see the music of our childhood as ideal, and the newer music as a destruction of that ideal?
I too share some sentiments regarding the Boulez and Messiaen peices. At what point does the "composition" become nothing more than an academic exercize and not music? While I do not listen to Messiaen regulary, I do own recordings of his work, and find them intriguing to study and listen to. When do we draw the line of studying music and studying notes?
Hi, I'm Geoff Summers - a senior in Music Composition. I probably would have taken this course even if it wasn't a specific requirement; establishing coherent form has always been one of the most elusive qualities in my own compositions and I hope to improve my own work while developing a deeper appreciation for this style of music.
Even though Messaien allowed himself a much greater degree of personal intervention in the compositional process of "Modes of Values and Intensities" than Boulez did with the overwhelmingly automated "Structures 1a", Messaien's work struck me as much more static and same sounding. His approach gave him the freedom to personally select the order of pitches from a predetermined mode, not terribly unlike a tonal composer may freely select pitches from a scale. The main difference is that because the durational values are permanently linked to their respective pitches, Messaien is somewhat inhibited in his ability to realize vertical sonorities, and severely handicapped in his ability to create balanced and aurally recognizable phrase structures. In Messiaen's defense, it may very well have been his intention to frustrate old notions of harmony and phrase structure. Also, the three voices are notably different in character, and the very low notes of the bottom voice do contribute to an audible structure. But even so, Messaien's work feels almost ambient to me because the dynamic and articulatory changes in the piece occur at the same rate throughout. I think the fluctuations of tempo and the less frequent dynamic changes in Structures 1a cause it to sound more sectional, and in my mind, more musical.
Post a Comment