I was given a brochure for music lessons (excerpts below). The writing
reflects a rational and romantic perspective on music, impressing me
enough to want to take the offered flute lessons. Any comments?


-Monart

-------

Why take Music Lessons?

We need art  It is our spiritual fuel.  Music is the most direct and
emotional art form, and creating it ourselves is one of the most
fulfilling and expressive things we can do.  Music can calm, inspire,
delight and excite us as it affirms our sense of life.


Even when the joy of music is our main motivation, when playing an
instrument, our minds and bodies also benefit by being challenged in
healthy ways.  Music-making develops:

     * concentration
     * coordination
     * memory
     * problem-solving and analysis skills
     * habits for healthy posture and muscle use
     * inner and outer awareness
     * fine motor skills
     * logical thinking
     * goal-oriented behavior
     * self-discipline
     * skill in dealing with pressure
     * experience working with others
     * confidence and independence




Why play the flute?

While each instrument creates its own uniquely beautiful music, you may
already feel an affinity for the open and expressive sound of the
flute.  If not, call me, and I'll have you listen to some inspiring
flute music!   There is something about the simple design of the flute
that lets flute players feel directly connected to their instrument and
their music.  The flute as an instrument is also one of the most
inexpensive and easiest to learn, and yet has some of the greatest
potential for musical advancement.

------

> Grant A. B. Gilman wrote (7/180:
>
> > [...]
> > It is true that I think pain/torment/angst are all very easily found
> in
> > Shostakovich's music.  However, this statment I made was in referrence
> to
> > this statement by Monart in digest 58:  "Shostakovich did not value
> > philosophy in any way like Rand did, and thus suffered under a
> > totalitarian Russia with little protest until his death in Moscow
> 1975."
> > Taking into context the impact symphonic music had at that time, maybe
> as
> > much or more than movies and tv have today, I believe that if
> audiences
> > perceived this "protest" in the music it was a powerful and inspiring
> > message.  Shostakovich was world famous before Stalin threatened
> > sensorship, so if he could superficially "conform" to the requests of
> > Stalin and thumb his nose at him at the same time, isn't that a form
> of
> > inspiration?
>
>
> Do you mean that Shostakovich (switching to this alternate spelling)
> wrote satirical music in protest of Stalin's regime? If so, what is
> satirical music? Is it music that exaggerates and ridicules something?
> If so, what? Something else musical or something else non-musical
> entirely? How does satirical music sound, as different from serious
> music? Is it suppose to make you laugh, or cry? (Whether at good or
> evil.)
> If most of Shostakovich's music is to be heard as satire against Stalin,
>
> then listeners like me who can't, who hear it mainly as turbulent,
> discontinuous, gloomy, and eerie music, we must not have the requisite
> sense of humor.

Satire is not the concept I would use.  Satire involves some kind of
humor, wit.  You probably got this from my "thumbing his nose" comment,
which is not what I meant if humor is the perception.  I meant more that
Shostakovich got his own way no matter what pressure were brought down on
him.

>
> Besides, while music (non-self-standing music) can be made to mimic
> non-musical objects and events (e.g., in soundtracks to movies or
> cartoons), the mimicry is very, very far from being a one-to-one
> correspondence. Moreover, music -- self-sufficient music, music in
> itself -- is too musical, too sui generis, to be translated into another
>
> form of communication, or to be used to encode messages of political
> protest. How is a listener to hear in Shostakovich's music that he
> "superficially 'conform[ed]' to the requests of Stalin and thumb[ed] his
>
> nose at him at the same time" (assuming that the listener were to
> believe that that was what Shostakovich was doing)?

That "mimicry is very, very far from being a one-to-one correspondence" I
agree with, but I don't understand your perception of this.  The mimicry
is created by EVERY other person to attempt to understand what
Shostakovich was saying through his music.  What he was saying about
himself, his situation, whatever else he may have been considering at the
time he was composing.
However, despite all of those elements that we might know through
musicologists, the music does stand on its own and should also be judged
as such apart from the known or perceived personal history of any
composer.  You are right that without words there is no direct
communication of a specific thing or place or person to the audience.
But, a musician MUST consider what the sounds mean in order come as close
as possible to the intent of the composer.  Not all of what the composer
intends can POSSIBLY be written on the page, it must be interpreted on
hearing.  Some people use musicology, others only use the score, most
combine both in one fashion or another.  Before there was the mystery of
Shostakovich the man, there was the power of his music to the audiences at
the time, and the audiences were all over the world even then!
Shostakovich gained popularity even in America before he died.  Even if
you don't like the music, you can not sufficiently deny that many people
were moved by his music then and now.

>
> Even if it's discounted, the fact that Shostakovich was a life-long
> supporter of socialism (in action, a Soviet state composer, like
> Albert Speer was a state architect to Hitler's Nazi regime) -- and even
> if music, in some para-musical way, could be used to protest against and
>
> overcome oppression and misery, I would ask again, would not romantic,
> lyrical, rousing, uplifting music -- in bold and clear melodies -- be
> more effective in this encouragement? What's the difference between
> most of Shostakovich's music and most of, e.g., Dvorak's? Dvorak's
> music can be described this way:
>
>     In Dvorak, there exists this "ray of sunshine", for his entire
> vision of the world, and all his music, are based on his belief in the
> beauty of life, and on his acceptance of the universe in thankfulness
> and joy.  --Michael Hoffman
>
> Would this also describe Shostakovich's music? If not, why not? Was he
> threatened with punishment if he did? Or did he choose not to write such
>
> music, punishment or not, because that's not his "cup of tea"?

"would not romantic, lyrical, rousing, uplifting music -- in bold and
clear melodies -- be more effective in this encouragement?"

I find all of these characteristics in Shostakovich's music.  Also,
romantic is a very broad term, so you must be more specific when using it.
  Romantic in music is a label used in a very general sense as a style and
thereby as a time period marker.  The Romantic period in music has
characteristics very different from those with the same label in visual
art and literature.  Shostakovich is more specifically from the Late
Romantic period.  Toward your contrast between Shostakovich and Dvorak,
the latter is representative of the Early Romantic period and died a full
two years before Shostakovich was born.  Both had extremely different
backgrounds.  Also, Dvorak wrote his 9th symphony, subtitled the "New
World", before he had even crossed the Atlantic.
Rousing is definately a word I would use to describe his music, like the
climax at the end of the first movement in the 6th symphony, or the
scherzo of the violin concerto.  Uplifting, certainly not, clearly, but I
don't see a problem with that.  I am not looking to Shostakovich nor any
other composer to uplift my spirits or soul, and why should they?  They
are not writing music for anyone else but themselves, and in some cases
other people enjoyed and paid them to do it while they were alive.  Most
were not recognized till they had long since passed on.  Lyrical qualities
in Shostakovich?  Absolutely.  3rd movement of the 5th symphony, where the
piece begins in the third division of the second violin part (Shostakovich
set it up so that there were 6 different violin parts, 4 viola, 4 celli,
and 2 bass) and grows outward.

>
> Is all music just a matter of taste? Or, is there something objective
> about music that makes it good (or bad or neutral) for your life? Not
> just "good for you" in some subjective, cup-of-tea sense -- but good
> for you regardless of whether you hear it as being good.

So what should it be then?  Should every piece we hear be a product of a
box of specifications?  All based on the same format?  Processed in mass
quantities formulated from the same equation with a few variables each
time?  And how is it that you can decide what is truly "good" for any one
person other than yourself?  Certainly, some qualities make us all similar
in many ways, but how do you know what music is going to be good for every
person?  If someone hears Beethoven's first symphony and thinks it to be
booring, drab, and uneventfull, how is explaining to them the objective
merits of it going to help them let the music enrich them?

>
> Is the goodness of Rand's novels just a matter of subjective taste, and
> just as morally and esthetically insignificant?

The significance of music is that we don't know WHY the sounds that are
produced make us feel and think the way we do.  Why the sounds move us.
However, what we do have the capability of doing is discovering WHAT those
things are that cause these inner reactions to the sounds.  Language is
not a mysterious thing, we understand it and we use it to communicate
generally and specifically.

Grant A. B. Gilman
ggmuze@...
(443)286.2160
Campus Box #214

"When people refuse to consider the source of wealth, what they refuse to
consider is the fact that wealth is the product of man's intellect, of his
creative ability, fully as much as is art, science, philosophy or any other
human value."

-Ayn Rand



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Grant A. B. Gilman wrote (7/180:

> [...]
> It is true that I think pain/torment/angst are all very easily found in
> Shostakovich's music.  However, this statment I made was in referrence to
> this statement by Monart in digest 58:  "Shostakovich did not value
> philosophy in any way like Rand did, and thus suffered under a
> totalitarian Russia with little protest until his death in Moscow 1975."
> Taking into context the impact symphonic music had at that time, maybe as
> much or more than movies and tv have today, I believe that if audiences
> perceived this "protest" in the music it was a powerful and inspiring
> message.  Shostakovich was world famous before Stalin threatened
> sensorship, so if he could superficially "conform" to the requests of
> Stalin and thumb his nose at him at the same time, isn't that a form of
> inspiration?


Do you mean that Shostakovich (switching to this alternate spelling)
wrote satirical music in protest of Stalin's regime? If so, what is
satirical music? Is it music that exaggerates and ridicules something?
If so, what? Something else musical or something else non-musical
entirely? How does satirical music sound, as different from serious
music? Is it suppose to make you laugh, or cry? (Whether at good or evil.)
If most of Shostakovich's music is to be heard as satire against Stalin,
then listeners like me who can't, who hear it mainly as turbulent,
discontinuous, gloomy, and eerie music, we must not have the requisite
sense of humor.

Besides, while music (non-self-standing music) can be made to mimic
non-musical objects and events (e.g., in soundtracks to movies or
cartoons), the mimicry is very, very far from being a one-to-one
correspondence. Moreover, music -- self-sufficient music, music in
itself -- is too musical, too sui generis, to be translated into another
form of communication, or to be used to encode messages of political
protest. How is a listener to hear in Shostakovich's music that he
"superficially 'conform[ed]' to the requests of Stalin and thumb[ed] his
nose at him at the same time" (assuming that the listener were to
believe that that was what Shostakovich was doing)?

Even if it's discounted, the fact that Shostakovich was a life-long
supporter of socialism (in action, a Soviet state composer, like
Albert Speer was a state architect to Hitler's Nazi regime) -- and even
if music, in some para-musical way, could be used to protest against and
overcome oppression and misery, I would ask again, would not romantic,
lyrical, rousing, uplifting music -- in bold and clear melodies -- be
more effective in this encouragement? What's the difference between
most of Shostakovich's music and most of, e.g., Dvorak's? Dvorak's
music can be described this way:

     In Dvorak, there exists this "ray of sunshine", for his entire
vision of the world, and all his music, are based on his belief in the
beauty of life, and on his acceptance of the universe in thankfulness
and joy.  --Michael Hoffman

Would this also describe Shostakovich's music? If not, why not? Was he
threatened with punishment if he did? Or did he choose not to write such
music, punishment or not, because that's not his "cup of tea"?

Is all music just a matter of taste? Or, is there something objective
about music that makes it good (or bad or neutral) for your life? Not
just "good for you" in some subjective, cup-of-tea sense -- but good
for you regardless of whether you hear it as being good.

Is the goodness of Rand's novels just a matter of subjective taste, and
just as morally and esthetically insignificant?


-Monart

From: Monart Pon

To: Concerto_Deliverance

Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 12:59 PM

Subject: [Concerto_Deliverance] "In Every Work of Genius"

An interesting article at Atlasphere, "In Every Work of Genius", by Peter de Jager:

"In a world seemingly starved for innovation and creativity, there’s no shortage of great ideas; our minds are unavoidably crowded to bursting with them. The shortage is in our ability, and perhaps in our courage, to assist them through to fruition."

"The title of this essay comes from Ralph Waldo Emerson’s quote, "'In every work of genius we recognize our own rejected thoughts'.”

"Genius isn't about conceiving an idea; it’s about giving birth to one, and nurturing it. It is about defending an idea from attack, and supporting it until it is ready to change the world."

http://www.theatlasphere.com/columns/050722-dejager-genius.php

I took this topic of Rand and Shostokovich to another forum, a
philosophy forum called the Autonomous, introducing the topic with the
same post as I put here, and preceded by:

"Some may be interested in a discussion (from another forum) on the the
similarities and differences between Rand and Shostokovich in life and
in art. One of the questions is: how should dissidence be expressed, and
when is "silent dissidence" (or silent sympathy) really just hypocrisy?"

The post received these comments from the forum's host, Regi Firehammer:

> Thank you for this very interesting post about the debate over
> Shostakovich's music and politics. I do not have an opinion germane to
> that debate, I'm afraid, because I do not know enough about either the
> composer or his politics.
>
> I do have a comment about a related general issue, however.
>
> In general, my interest in art is divorced from
> personalities, including an artist's politics or philosophy. There are
> many examples of what I mean. Much classical music is liturgical or
> religious in nature. Even though religion was the "inspiration" for
> many composers, the music they wrote is universal, even the
> choral work, where the words are explicitly religious, the music
> itself is grand and uplifting. Victor Hugo's works are among the most
> heroic and romantic in all of literature conveying a sense of life
> which contradicted his own explicit philosohy.
>
> Unless an artist's politics or philosophy directly influence their
> works in a way that is detrimental, and the connection is obvious, to
> judge a person's work on the basis of their politics or philosophy is
> akin to the ad hominem fallacy. I think Rand sometimes had a
> tendency to do that very thing. I think a person's philosophy and
> politics frequently do effect their work, and where it is obvious it
> might be interesting to know what the effect is--but still, good art
> can be done by bad people, just as the truth is sometime eloquently
> stated by fools.
>
> Regi

I responded:

> > Thank you for this very interesting post about the debate
> > over Shostakovich's music and politics.
>
> Thank you for your comments. The discussion is also about the
> comparisions between two well-known Russian-born artists of the same
> period, how their respective art are in sharp contrast to each other,
> and why. Of course, the comparison is made more difficult because of
> the differences between literature and music.
>
> >[...] Victor Hugo's works are among the most heroic and
> > romantic in all of literature conveying a sense of life
> > which contradicted his own explicit philosohy.
>
> But a sense of life is like an implicit philosophy. If so, then a
> contradiction between a sense of life and explicit philosophy could
> also be a contradiction between two implicit philosophies, between two
> conflicted senses of life, one of which is more explicated than the other.
>
> > Unless an artist's politics or philosophy directly
> > influence their works in a way that is detrimental, and
> > the connection is obvious, to judge a person's work on
> > the basis of their politics or philosophy is akin to the
> > ad hominem fallacy.
>
> That may be true, if that's what's happening. But, if one isn't so
> much criticizing the work because of the person, but, instead, is
> questioning how a beautiful work might be even better -- given a true
> philosophy, especially a true explicit philosophy. E.g., Ayn Rand's
> romanticism, given her objectivism. (Or, is it also, her objectivism,
> given her romanticism?)
>
> > [...] I think a person's philosophy and politics
> > frequently do effect their work, and where it is obvious
> > it might be interesting to know what the effect is...
>
> One major effect is on the morality that's practiced. And does not
> one's morality has a lot to do with the truth, goodness, and beauty of
> one's work? (Rand rejected socialist Russia, escaped, and created both
> her romantic sense of life and objectivist philosophy; Shostokovich
> embraced socialist Russia, accepted (supported) the socialist
> philosophy and culture, and composed his predominantly a-romantic music.)
>
> > --but still, good art can be done by bad people, just as the truth
> is sometime eloquently stated by fools.
>
> True, but, just as a fool can be an eloguent parrot, a conflicted
> artist can't create as good an art as an integrated one, even less
> than an integrated, rational one: e.g., Rand vs Shostokovich, or
> Rachmaninoff and Tchaikosky vs Shostokovich (except for his Andante
> 2nd Piano).

http://usabig.com/wowbbforums/view_topic.php?id=213&forum_id=6&jump_to=2393#p239\
3

This is my full resume.  Again, this is not meant as any kind of higher
ground.  In fact, if it impresses you enough to continue talking with me
despite my recent attitude, then all the better.  It is refreshing to have
musicians to talk to that aren't so wishy-washy and narrow-minded when it
comes to everything else besides music.

The question marks below are really bullets that don't transfer from Word.
  Also, all the spacing is off a little for the same reason.  I hope you
can interpret all of it well enough through these mishaps!



Grant Austin Boyd Gilman
Conductor

606 Saint Paul St.  #214
Baltimore, MD    21202
ggmuze@...
(443) 286.2160


Education
 Peabody Conservatory Masters in Music Conducting Program
2004-Present; Gustav Meier and Markand Thakar, Co-Directors
 Peabody Conservatory Undergraduate Violin Performance Program
2000-2004; Pamela Frank, Misha Rosenker, and Martin Beaver, Teachers

Workshops
 International Conductors Institute, 2004, Directed by Gustav
Meier and Rossen Milanov, held in Sofia, Bulgaria
 Conductors Institute of South Carolina, 2003, Directed by Donald
Portnoy

Full Orchestra
 Aria Recital in 2005, with Bolormaa Jugdersuren, Soprano
 Conducting recital in 2003, at the Peabody Conservatory with
students of the Peabody Conservatory, works by Elgar and William Schuman
 Conducting recital in 2001, at the Peabody Conservatory with
students of the Peabody Conservatory, works by Debussy, Arutjunjan, and
Howard Hanson

Small and Mixed Ensemble
 Micro-Concerto for small chamber ensemble and percussionist, by
Steve Mackey, performed in 2005
 Songs of the River for small chamber ensemble and soprano, by
Hillary Kruh, performance at the Baltimore Composers Forum in 2005
 Façade, An Entertainment, music by William Walton, poetry by
Edith Sitwell, performance at the Baltimore School for the Performing Arts
in 2005
 River for large percussion ensemble and saxophone quartet by
Bernard Hoffer, with members of the Peabody Percussion Ensemble and the
Peabody Sax Quartet in 2004
 Combinations for percussion ensemble by Harold Farberman, with
members of the Peabody Percussion Ensemble in 2003 & 2004

Composition and Arranging
 Original arrangement of Euch Luften, die mein Klagen aria from
Wagner’s Lohengrin performed in 2005
 Original composition, Madeline, performed in 2000
 Original arrangement of “The Feather Theme” from Forest Gump
performed in 1999

Teachers
	 Conducting
 Gustav Meier, Director of the Graduate Conducting Program at the
Peabody Conservatory
 Markand Thakar, Co-Director Director of the Graduate Conducting
Program at the Peabody Conservatory, Music Director of the Duluth Symphony
Orchestra, Music Director of the Baltimore Chamber Orchestra
 Harlan Parker, Wind Ensemble Director, Music Education
Coordinator at Peabody Conservatory
 Christopher Wilkins, Music Director Emeritus of the San Antonio
Symphony
	 Violin
 Pamela Frank, Violin Professor at Peabody Conservatory, Curtis
Institute of Music
 Misha Rosenker, Former Violin Professor at Peabody Conservatory,
Associate Professor of Violin at Drake University
 Martin Beaver, Former Violin Professor at Peabody Conservatory,
1st Violinist Tokyo String Quartet
 Ertan Torgul, Associate Concertmaster, San Antonio Symphony
 Stephanie Sant’ Ambrogio, Concertmaster, San Antonio Symphony
 Bonnie R. Boyd, San Antonio Symphony
	 Composition
 Robert X. Rodriguez, Former Composer in Residence of the San
Antonio Symphony
 James Balentine, University of Texas at San Antonio



   Repertoire Performed
  Arutjunjan
 Trumpet Concerto
  Bizet
 Carmen Suite No.1
  Debussy
 “Prelude a l'apres-midi d'un faune”
  Dvorak
 “Mesiku na nebi hlubokem” from Rusalka
Elgar
 Cello Concerto
 “Enigma Variations”
Farberman, Harold
 “Combinations”
Hanson, Howard
 Symphony No.2 (Romantic)
Hoffer, Bernard
 “River”
Kruh, Hillary
 “Songs of the River”
Mackey, Steve
 “Micro-Concerto”
Massenet
 “Il est doux, il est bon” from Heriodade
  Schuman, William
 Symphony No.5 (Symphony for Strings)
  Strauss, Richard
 “Sein wir wieder gut” from Ariadne
Verdi
 “Tacea, la notte” from Il Trovatore
Wagner
 “Du bist der Lenz” from Walkure
 “Euch Luften, die mein Klagen” from Lohengrin
Walton, William
 “Façade, An Entertainment”

  Repertoire Studied
  Asia, Daniel
 Symphony No.4
  Beethoven
 Symphony No.9
 Symphony No.5
Berlioz
 “Symphony Fantastique”
  Bernstein
 West Side Story:  Symphonic Dance Suite
 Overture to Candide
Brahms
 Symphony No.1
 Symphony No.4
Debussy
 “La Mer”
  Dvorak
 Symphony No.8
 Slavonic Dances, Op. 46
 Serenade for Strings
  Haydn
 Symphony No.99
 Symphony No.104
  Janacek
 “Idyll” For Strings
  Jones, Samuel
 “Elegy” for strings
(Continued on Following Page)
  (“Repertoire Studied” Continued)
  Lizt
 “Mazeppa”
  Mendelssohn
 Midsummernight’s Dream
 Symphony No.4
 ”
  Mozart
 Symphony No.36, “Linz”
 Symphony No.39
 “Hai’ gia vinta la causa” from Figaro
 “Requiem Mass”
 Divertimento K. 138
 Selected Arias from “Cosi fan tutte” and “Le Nozze di Figaro”
  Puccini
 “Si, mi ciamano Mimi” from La Boheme
  Rogers, Fitz
 “Still”
Rossini
 Overture to “L’Italiana in Algeri
Schubert
 Symphony No.5
  Schumann
 Symphony No.1
  Shostakovich
 Symphony No.13
Strauss, Richard
 “Also Sprach Zarathustra”
Stravinsky
 “Petrushka”
 L’histoire du Soldat
 “Apollon Musagete”
Tchaikovsky
 Symphony No.6, “Pathetique”
 Symphony No.5
 Symphony No.4
 Violin Concerto
 Romeo and Juliet Overture
 Serenade for Strings
Verdi
 Overture to “La Forza del Destino”
Wagner
 “Siegfried-Idyll”








Grant A. B. Gilman
ggmuze@...
(443)286.2160
Campus Box #214

"When people refuse to consider the source of wealth, what they refuse to
consider is the fact that wealth is the product of man's intellect, of his
creative ability, fully as much as is art, science, philosophy or any other
human value."

-Ayn Rand





____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

I admit, based on these responses, that I have probably been mixing
arguments.  I am almost positive that my emotion on this subject has
driven much of the verbiage I have used.  So now I would like to try and
better outline my thoughts on this subject.
First I want to start with my personal qualifications.  This is ABSOLUTELY
not intended to position myself as the "all knowing" or anything self
assuming like that, it is just to further explain my position and show the
basis for my passion on this subject.  In other words, I wish to show that
I am no slouch in music, but most certainly a beginner in philosophical
studies.
I will be a second year masters in conducting at Peabody Conservatory in
Baltimore next year in the studio of Gustav Meier.  I earned my
undergraduate in violin performance also at Peabody, having taken from
Martin Beaver (now the first violinist of the Tokyo String Quartet) and
Pamela Frank (world reknown soloist, though presently injured and only
teaching).  I would like to include my professional resume, but I will
include it in a subsequent posting so that no one has to read it if they
don't care, which I wouldn't blame anyone for!
Anyway, now to the point.

Nova's post:
> Grant said "The one Andante movement may stand on its own from an
> entertainment perspective, but it is not an entire work
> on its own by any means." You have a point that one cannot judge an
> entire piece or a composer's oeuvre by one movement--and this point is
> entirely irrelvent here, as this is not at all what Monart is doing. Why
> argue where there is no disagreement?
>
> Monart is using this "Andante movement" as an example of what he finds
> to be an rare exception in Shostakovich's music--an expression of
> untainted joy/ etc. If, as Grant claims, Monart had "obviously" never
> heard any other Shostakovich, why would Monart say this quality is rare
> in Shostakovich's music? Comparison and contrast by definition requires
> looking at more than one thing. Grant, you yourself have said "...if you
> know the music... then this element of protest and pain of persecution
> is overwhelmingly obvious."-- so it seems as you should agree with
> Monart that, in terms of emotional quality in Shostakovich's music,
> pain/torment/angst is the norm, whereas untainted joy/tenderness/heroism
> is the exception.

Absolutely right, this is an area where I mixed arguments.  I believe I
picked out what I was emotionaly struck by and argued it in the opposite
direction of the statement.
It is true that I think pain/torment/angst are all very easily found in
Shostakovich's music.  However, this statment I made was in referrence to
this statement by Monart in digest 58:  "Shostakovich did not value
philosophy in any way like Rand did, and thus suffered under a
totalitarian Russia with little protest until his death in Moscow 1975."
Taking into context the impact symphonic music had at that time, maybe as
much or more than movies and tv have today, I believe that if audiences
perceived this "protest" in the music it was a powerful and inspiring
message.  Shostakovich was world famous before Stalin threatened
sensorship, so if he could superficially "conform" to the requests of
Stalin and thumb his nose at him at the same time, isn't that a form of
inspiration?  His first four symphonies are so different from all the
following up to the 13th because the first four were his chosen style.
What is inspiring to me is that he found many opportunities to inject his
own style that Stalin thought "unpatriotic" into what Stalin requested.
In the face of such injustice limiting free expression Shostakovich still
brandished his musical prowess.  Had he blatantly continued on with the
music he was writing then Stalin may have had him murdered anyway, and not
just his family, friends, and musical acquaintances.  However, even after
all that said, you are correct, that I agree the norm for his music is
"pain/torment/angst," but though it may be splitting hairs, I would
include "tenderness/heroism" minus the joy.  Heroism for the reasons just
mentioned, and tenderness supported by many other examples in the music.
One notable one (since we all seem to be familiar with the 5th) being the
horn and flute, and in the recap horn and viola (in a very high, nasal
range) duos in the first movement, over an undulating string rhythm.


> Judging the value of these expressive choices is
> another question, in which you may disagree.

Right, I do, and this is probably what I was arguing, instead of Monart's
point.  My mistake.

> When I consider sections of Shostakovich's music that seem "untainted"
> in joy or heroic character, in the context of the whole piece or all his
> work, their joyful character seems to become tainted. It has often been
> said that such heroic-sounding momements (such as the character of the
> Finale of his 5th Symphony) are intended as parodies of the character of
> Soviet villains, rather than sincere expressions of admirable virtues.
> When I see moments of joy and tenderness in the context of violence and
> torment, these moments are less clearly life-affirming and more
> ambiguous in terms of the sense of life expressed. The point is that
> considering this Andante in its wider context probably only helps
> Monart's argument that joy is rare in Shostakovich's music.

I am a little confused here.  Can not joy come from triumph over "violince
and torment"?  I have never heard that exact argument, that the finale is
"intended as [a] parody of the character of Soviet villains," though I
disagree with the analysis anyway.  I can see no reason why Shostakovich
would create an image of the "Soviet villains," parody or not, rather than
an image of his own boot squashing the same villains.  The latter is
always the impression I have gotten.  If I could have put words to it, it
would be something like:  "YOU WANT YOUR HAPPY, MAJOR KEY ENDING, THEN
HERE IT IS YOU ....... GRRRRRRRRR!"  I know that seems kind of funny, but
it is my take.  Not to mention, I also believe Shostakovich wins out on
the last bar, where he eliminates all other chord tones but the tonic,
four octaves thick, which gives the music a hint of minor, NOT major.  So,
basically my point is that the triumph I hear is in a "bear your chest and
go to battle for what you believe in so strongly that nothing will ever
stop you" kind of way.  I understand that this is not joy, by any means,
but I was inspired by the courage Shostakovich had to write it that way,
with the risk of continued threats if even one part of the piece was
misread by "the powers that be."
Anyway, my point is that I see "joy and tenderness in the context of
violence and torment" as even more powerful since it is in contrast,
possibly in triumph over.  In fact I think in that case the "sense of life
expressed" is even less "ambiguous" since Shostakovich is only expressing
his own life, and the feelings he had therein.  Probably not necessarily
virtuous, but certainly not ambiguous.


> Analyzing the features of a single movement of music does not reveal
> one's "blatantly obvious" "total lack of musical knowledge." In fact,
> Grant, as you seem to be one to like credentials, I have a degree in
> music, and through my studies, movements of music were frequently
> studied for features within themselves, as well as within the context of
> the piece and a composer's oeuvre.

Absolutely right, you are correct.  This is also what I have done nonstop
since I was in high school.  Studying individual movements can reveal
elements of a composer's technique on a small and very large level.  I
think I was trying to make a point out of an argument not made.


> Grant, you are complaining that evidence is not provided for Monart's
> assertions. Monart said that "Whether Shostokovich was a dissident or
> sympathizer of communism may be debatable, but whatever dissidence he
> did show, in music or in words,
> is neither courageous nor inspiring." Personally, I find many moments in
> Shostakovich's music that feel courageous and inspiring. But I think
> that Monart was referring more to the premise that Shostakovich
> protested the Soviet condition through angst in his music---Monart finds
> this form of protest "neither courageous nor inspiring." Argue with his
> premises or conclusion as you like. But Grant, please provide some clear
> evidence for your own bold assertions:
>
> "It is more than obvious that you do not in fact know or have studied
> more than this one section of one work by
> Shostakovich."
>
> "Your statement shows an outrageous lack of knowledge
> of this man's music. "
>
> "Your total lack of musical knowledge is blatantly
> obvious."

You are right, I have no real basis for these acusations, and I must say
they are very hard to re-read.  I appologize.  I was very worked up.  I
believe it is very hard to interpret intentions and inflections via this
email format, and I misinterpret them quite frequently.  That is where I
believe I went awry.

> To me it seems that the real unanswered questions are:
>
> What is it really that Shostakovich's music expresses?
> Can music that expresses pain and suffering be beautiful?

Just for the record, I do believe this to be true.


> What role should dissonance/conflict/"dissidence" play in music?

I am quite impressed with this statement.  When I made this argument
previously I realized later that I did not thuroughly point out my
connection between dissidence and dissonance.  This statement not only
proves that you interpreted this for me, but that you didn't hold my lack
of explaination against me, a courtesy that I have obviously not afforded
to Monart, for which I am sorry.

> What is the proper artistic response to pain and suffering in the real
> world?
> What in music is inspiring and courageous?

I hope that much of my response here has made my view on these two
questions clearer, hopefully in a much less childish way.

I promise to hereafter assume much less and act more professionaly.  I
hope that you can forgive my presumptious attitude, since in real life I
am mostly very humble.

Cheers,


Grant A. B. Gilman
ggmuze@...
(443)286.2160
Campus Box #214

"When people refuse to consider the source of wealth, what they refuse to
consider is the fact that wealth is the product of man's intellect, of his
creative ability, fully as much as is art, science, philosophy or any other
human value."

-Ayn Rand





__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html

Grant, you wrote:

> Monart,
> If you don't have sufficient grounds to base your "message" on, then you
> shouldn't put it out in the first place unless you are willing to have it
> picked apart.

Where have you really picked it apart? Merely saying you have, doesn't
make it so. The "grounds" of my message was the parallels and
comparisons between Rand and Shostokovich in their lives and works,
particular in Atlas Shrugged and Piano Concerto No. 2., raising
questions of how their philosophy and morality influenced their art.
Whether you agree or not that the 2nd Piano (especially the lyrical
Andante) is among his most romantic (i.e., individualistic and rational)
work, or that romantic music is good for life. But you should be able to
hear what usual listeners hear, that the Andante sounds in sharp
contrast from Shostokovich's other works altogether.  It sounds more
like Rachmaninoff and Tchaikovsky, like Dvorak and Debussy, Bizet and
Saint-Saens, Schubert and Bach, like Mills-Cockell. (If you don't know
who John Mills-Cockell is and you're on this forum, then you really
don't much about me and have no basis to appraise my knowledge of music
or of Shostokovich.)

Now what is it you want to criticize again? The message, or the messenger?

-Monart

About Shostokovich's 2nd Piano Concerto, I forgot to mention that one
recording I heard was conducted by Maxim Shostokovich, Dimitri's son,
for whom the concerto was written for his 19th birthday in 1957. Along
with Maxim on that recording was the pianist Dimitri Jr., Maxim's son.
(For which sons and daughters in 1957 did Rand write Atlas Shrugged?)

Through music and art, there's life after death.

-Monart

I would just to clarify some issues in this discussion.

Grant said "The one Andante movement may stand on its own from an
entertainment perspective, but it is not an entire work
on its own by any means." You have a point that one cannot judge an
entire piece or a composer's oeuvre by one movement--and this point is
entirely irrelvent here, as this is not at all what Monart is doing. Why
argue where there is no disagreement?

Monart is using this "Andante movement" as an example of what he finds
to be an rare exception in Shostakovich's music--an expression of
untainted joy/ etc. If, as Grant claims, Monart had "obviously" never
heard any other Shostakovich, why would Monart say this quality is rare
in Shostakovich's music? Comparison and contrast by definition requires
looking at more than one thing. Grant, you yourself have said "...if you
know the music... then this element of protest and pain of persecution
is overwhelmingly obvious."-- so it seems as you should agree with
Monart that, in terms of emotional quality in Shostakovich's music,
pain/torment/angst is the norm, whereas untainted joy/tenderness/heroism
is the exception. Judging the value of these expressive choices is
another question, in which you may disagree.

When I consider sections of Shostakovich's music that seem "untainted"
in joy or heroic character, in the context of the whole piece or all his
work, their joyful character seems to become tainted. It has often been
said that such heroic-sounding momements (such as the character of the
Finale of his 5th Symphony) are intended as parodies of the character of
Soviet villains, rather than sincere expressions of admirable virtues.
When I see moments of joy and tenderness in the context of violence and
torment, these moments are less clearly life-affirming and more
ambiguous in terms of the sense of life expressed. The point is that
considering this Andante in its wider context probably only helps
Monart's argument that joy is rare in Shostakovich's music.

Analyzing the features of a single movement of music does not reveal
one's "blatantly obvious" "total lack of musical knowledge." In fact,
Grant, as you seem to be one to like credentials, I have a degree in
music, and through my studies, movements of music were frequently
studied for features within themselves, as well as within the context of
the piece and a composer's oeuvre.

Grant, you are complaining that evidence is not provided for Monart's
assertions. Monart said that "Whether Shostokovich was a dissident or
sympathizer of communism may be debatable, but whatever dissidence he
did show, in music or in words,
is neither courageous nor inspiring." Personally, I find many moments in
Shostakovich's music that feel courageous and inspiring. But I think
that Monart was referring more to the premise that Shostakovich
protested the Soviet condition through angst in his music---Monart finds
this form of protest "neither courageous nor inspiring." Argue with his
premises or conclusion as you like. But Grant, please provide some clear
evidence for your own bold assertions:

"It is more than obvious that you do not in fact know or have studied
more than this one section of one work by
Shostakovich."

"Your statement shows an outrageous lack of knowledge
of this man's music. "

"Your total lack of musical knowledge is blatantly
obvious."


To me it seems that the real unanswered questions are:

What is it really that Shostakovich's music expresses?
Can music that expresses pain and suffering be beautiful?
What role should dissonance/conflict/"dissidence" play in music?
What is the proper artistic response to pain and suffering in the real
world?
What in music is inspiring and courageous?


Nova

Grant A. B. Gilman wrote:

>
> From: Grant Gilman
> To: Monart Pon
>
>
> Monart wrote:
> > Shostakovich did not value philosophy in any way like Rand
> > did, and thus suffered under a totalitarian Russia with little protest
> > until his death in Moscow 1975.
>
> This statement that Shostakovich "suffered...with little protest" is not
> entirely true. Since Stalin's media publicly tore down Shostakovich's 4th
> symphony, Shostakovich thereafter found many ways to inject protest into
> his music. Depending upon what you read this topic may seem dedebatable.
> However, if you know the music...and I mean REALLY know the music, then
> this element of protest and pain of persecution is overwhelmingly obvious.
>
>
>
> Grant A. B. Gilman
> ggmuze@...
> (443)286.2160
> Campus Box #214
>
> "When people refuse to consider the source of wealth, what they refuse
> to consider is the fact that wealth is the product of man's intellect,
> of his creative ability, fully as much as is art, science, philosophy
> or any other human value."
>
> -Ayn Rand
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Sell on Yahoo! Auctions – no fees. Bid on great items.
> http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>
>
> Forum website <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Concerto_Deliverance>
> John Mills-Cockell's Concerto of Deliverance album website
> http://www.starshipaurora.com/concertoofdeliverance.html
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     * Visit your group "Concerto_Deliverance
>       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Concerto_Deliverance>" on the web.
>     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       Concerto_Deliverance-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>      
<mailto:Concerto_Deliverance-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

Monart,
If you don't have sufficient grounds to base your "message" on, then you
shouldn't put it out in the first place unless you are willing to have it
picked apart.  I'm not claiming to know you, I'm putting your statements
into question by pointing out lack of research in this specific area.
I did not mean to affect you personally, and I am sorry if I did.  All I
wanted was to challenge your very assuming statements.  I have no problem
with you questioning the philosophical basis for Shostakovich's composing.
  It has probably never really been studied.  I just couldn't swallow that
your assertion that his music did not contain beauty, besides this one
section.  Had I not said anything you may never have thought twice about
it, or anyone else for that matter.

Cheers,

Grant A. B. Gilman
ggmuze@...
(443)286.2160
Campus Box #214

"When people refuse to consider the source of wealth, what they refuse to
consider is the fact that wealth is the product of man's intellect, of his
creative ability, fully as much as is art, science, philosophy or any other
human value."

-Ayn Rand



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Grant,

If you don't like the message, don't shoot the messenger (especially
when you don't even know him).

-Monart

Sorry about all the typos guys!  I don't know why that happens when I use
the spell check... it kind of defeats the purpose!

Grant A. B. Gilman
ggmuze@...
(443)286.2160
Campus Box #214

"When people refuse to consider the source of wealth, what they refuse to
consider is the fact that wealth is the product of man's intellect, of his
creative ability, fully as much as is art, science, philosophy or any other
human value."

-Ayn Rand





____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

From:  Grant GiGilmanTo:  MoMonartoPon
MoMonartrote:
> Contrasted with his other music, the Andante from his
> 2ndndiano Concerto was a far more powerful protest.
> Whether ShShostokovichsic] was a dissident or sympathizer of communism
may be
> debatable, but whatever dissidence he did show, in music or in words,
> is neither courageous nor inspiring.

With all due respect to your opinion about the "courageousness" of
ShShostakovich'susic, your statement shows an outrageous lack of knowledge
of this man's music.  Before I knew any of the history behind
ShShostakovich'sife, his music (first the 5ththnd 13ththymphonies and
other pieces later) along with that of Mahler, Beethoven,
RaRachmaninovElgar, William ScSchumanetc..., inspired me to be the best
musician I possibly could.  I had nothing else to go on but the raw
passion and beauty of the sounds.  Without "dissidence" in music there is
no conflict or rise of energy, and without those things there is also no
climax and no release, no triumph.  All of which are also essential
elements of a novel.
There is another part of your argument that I take great issue with.  You
continue to point out the Andante movement from ShShostakovich'sndndiano
concerto.  Here, again, your total lack of musical knowledge is blatantly
obvious.  Picking out one movement of any work can have its own merits, as
I am sure you are wanting to point out.  But, using one movement of a
mumultiovement work is like taking one chapter or a concurrent section of
chapters from Atlas and saying "this is the essence of the book!" and then
following it by saying that this is all you need to read in order to find
out everything there is to know about Rand and ObObjectivism A
mumultiovement symphony is not something you can pick apart just because
the sections are significantly marked.  The one Andante movement may stand
on its own from an entertainment perspective, but it is not an entire work
on its own by any means.  Without the outer movements it is a stagnant
character without context.
Once more, I encourage you to actually investigate more of
ShShostakovich'susic.  It is more than obvious that you do not in fact
know or have studied more than this one section of one work by
ShShostakovich This is a great blow to your statement beginning
"Contrasted with his other music," since you do not know his other music.

Grant A. B. Gilman
ggmuze@...
(443)286.2160
Campus Box #214

"When people refuse to consider the source of wealth, what they refuse to
consider is the fact that wealth is the product of man's intellect, of his
creative ability, fully as much as is art, science, philosophy or any other
human value."

-Ayn Rand





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Grant wrote, "if you know the music [of Shostokovich]...and I mean
REALLY know the music, then this element of protest and pain of
persecution is overwhelmingly obvious."

Even if it could be proved that Shostokovich expressed his protest and
pain in his music, a question could still be asked: is writing painful
music the best way to protest? Imagine Rand protesting against
totalitarianism and collectivism by writing Atlas Shrugged and
Fountainhead as novels of pain and suffering. No, she fought ugliness by
presenting beauty, she fought evil by extolling the good. Not so with
Shostokovich. Contrasted with his other music, the Andante from his
2nd Piano Concerto was a far more powerful protest.

Whether Shostokovich was a dissident or sympathizer of communism may be
debatable, but whatever dissidence he did show, in music or in words,
is neither courageous nor inspiring.


-Monart

(Of interest to some, a summary of the Shostokovich debate is at
http://www.siue.edu/~aho/musov/deb/begin.html )

------

Revisionism versus anti-revisionism

At its simplest, revisionism consists of the view that Shostakovich was,
for much of his life, in conflict with the Soviet regime; and that, as
such, his actions, creative and personal, betoken a man of considerable
moral stature whose associated thoughts and feelings are tangible in his
music, in ways both general and particular. (The particular instances of
this orientation consist of a language of musical codes, many of which
are already known and others of which are in the process of being
discovered.) In this view of Shostakovich, the composer is often said to
have been a "secret (or hidden) dissident
<http://www.siue.edu/%7Eaho/musov/deb/qdis.html>" - i.e., a moral
dissenter who differed from the paradigmatic Soviet dissidents of the
1960s in refraining from public verbal expressions of his dissent,
confining this to his music. (Exceptions -- more or less explicit
expressions of dissent -- can be found in Shostakovich's letters to
Isaak Glikman <http://www.siue.edu/%7Eaho/musov/doubletalk.html>, in
several of his reported statements to friends and colleagues, and in the
disputed memoir Testimony.) Anti-revisionists often accuse revisionists
of adopting an "ideological" line on Shostakovich which mirrors that of
the Soviet Union. Revisionists argue, on the contrary, that the debate
is a question not of ideology but of morality.

At its simplest, anti-revisionism takes the form of several, not
necessarily mutually exclusive, views of Shostakovich which stand
opposed to the idea of him as a "secret dissident" resistant to the
Soviet regime. Anti-revisionists see Shostakovich as a morally flawed
man for whom Testimony (insofar as any of it can be trusted) represented
an attempt to rewrite, and hence justify, an inglorious life. This life
was either that of an earnest communist who never seriously questioned
the Soviet system; a cowardly trimmer who conformed out of fear and
self-seeking cynicism; or a naive blunderer who took on the false
appearance of a secret dissident through farcical coincidence or as a
result of over-interpretation by his contemporaries or those who came
after him. For most anti-revisionists, speculation on the composer's
outlook is bogus or irrelevant (although some hardline anti-revisionists
remain convinced that he was an orthodox Communist and that "his" public
statements are dependable evidence of this). Suggestions that
Shostakovich's music contains hidden meanings is, generally, anathema to
anti-revisionists, who concede with reluctance and aesthetic distaste
any instances of this which cannot be definitely rejected.

-----

http://www.geocities.com/rickredrick/Overview.html

*  Shostakovich was a patriotic Soviet citizen and lifelong socialist. He
revered Lenin and the revolution. He rejected Stalinism. He was a member of the
Communist Party from 1960 until his death in 1975.  He was himself a Soviet
official- a deputy member of the Supreme Soviet and also the Secretary (highest
office) of the Union of Composers of the Russian Federation.  In many works,
including symphonies 2, 3, 7, 11, and 12, he honored heroic accomplishments of
the Soviet people. Despite a two brief periods of friction much dramatized in
the West, he was by far the most often, and most highly, officially honored
member of the Soviet musical establishment in its history.

These facts were obvious in 1975 and remain consistent with everything that
Shostakovich can be proven to have ever said or written.

From:  Grant Gilman
To:  Monart Pon


Monart wrote:
> Shostakovich did not value philosophy in any way like Rand
> did, and thus suffered under a totalitarian Russia with little protest
> until his death in Moscow 1975.

This statement that Shostakovich "suffered...with little protest" is not
entirely true.  Since Stalin's media publicly tore down Shostakovich's 4th
symphony, Shostakovich thereafter found many ways to inject protest into
his music.  Depending upon what you read this topic may seem dedebatable.
However, if you know the music...and I mean REALLY know the music, then
this element of protest and pain of persecution is overwhelmingly obvious.



Grant A. B. Gilman
ggmuze@...
(443)286.2160
Campus Box #214

"When people refuse to consider the source of wealth, what they refuse to
consider is the fact that wealth is the product of man's intellect, of his
creative ability, fully as much as is art, science, philosophy or any other
human value."

-Ayn Rand





____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions – no fees. Bid on great items.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

Once, when I was listening to the sweet, lyrical Andante of
Shostokovich's 2nd Piano Concerto, I thought of Rand and checked out a
few dates. Shostokovich's 2nd Piano Concerto was published in 1957, the
same year as Rand's Atlas Shrugged. Both Rand and Shostokovich were born
in Russia nearly the same year: Rand, 1905, and Shostokovich, 1906.
Other comparisons: Rand left Russia and Shostokovich didn't. Both are
regarded as master artists by their admirers, with Shostokovich being
called 20th Century's most tragic composer, and Rand, the most heroic
novelist. Shostokovich did not value philosophy in any way like Rand
did, and thus suffered under a totalitarian Russia with little protest
until his death in Moscow 1975. Was Shostokovich able to read Rand? How
would his music have been different, if at all, if he had read Rand, or
if he had escaped to America (assuming he wanted to?) What influences on
the music does the kind of philosophy that a composer (or artist) has,
or the kind of culture a composer (or artist) lives in? What would Rand
have thought of him and his music?


-Monart

One of the topics discussed here, following the announcement a few weeks ago about CONCERTO OF DELIVERANCE by John Mills-Cockell, was about the division or distinction between commercial and art (non-commercial) music. That the distinction exists is significant in understanding the state of truth, beauty, and justice in the modern music culture.
What makes music "commercial" and what makes it "art"? Is the key distinction found in their differences of popularity? Or differences, too, in complexity, intelligence, craftsmanship, originality, authenticity...? Who is to judge? By what standards of truth (and beauty) are the judgments based? Can (and should) appreciation of "fine" art be taught and encouraged? Does art music have to be non-popular and non-commercial? Is it possible for music to be both artistic and popular? (e.g., Dvorak's?) Is popular music commercially successful because it is truly enjoyed by many people, or is it just that they are fooled, or don't know otherwise (or don't care to)? To make art music popular: does it just take expensive commercial advertising? How can one be sure that such investment will pay back? Can people's music comprehension and preferences be improved? Must art musicians do it only for love, not money? How could they not feel the ambivalence? How many art musicians stop before
they start? How many struggle on, embittered by years of discouragement and lack of recognition, even turning away from their own kind? How many others prefer to maintain the commercial/artistic distinction, as a form of elitism and cloak for their mediocrity?
These are hard questions, and just a few basic ones. Appended below is a concrete example, asking: What are the differences between, say, a forum like this one, and the ones at MTV.com? One difference is this: the same CONCERTO OF DELIVERANCE announcement I had posted here was banned at MTV, shortly after it appeared there. Is the commercial/artistic dichotomy at work here? Or just random negligence or prejudice? Their quoting of the "Guidelines" aren't much help. (Interestingly, the MuchMusic forums have not removed the announcement yet.)
- Monart
___________________________________________________
-------- Original Message --------

Wendy Carlos (of the SWITCHED-ON BACH recordings) had this comment on 
"serious contemporary music" (in the liner notes of her DIGITAL MOONSCAPES):

"I have long had an idea as to the reason there is so small an audience 
for serious contemporary music. As Tom Wolfe pointed out in FROM BAUHAUS 
TO OUR HOUSE, since about World War I, architects (and fine artists too) 
have become more afraid of appearing "bourgeois" than wanting to give 
delight to their audience. In so doing they have moved in smaller and 
smaller concentric circles until all stand on the same square inch of 
safely non-bourgeois style. I believe this applies as much to modern 
music as to the other arts. So, is it any wonder that the audience at 
large has fled to the decidedly more human pop culture? My hunch is that 
they don't hate music that is *modern*, only music that is *boring*!"

How true is that? Is it typical of serious new music that it is 
"boring"? Why is there a dichotomy between "serious" and "pop" music? 
Could there be contemporary music that's both serious (in intent and 
execution) and popular (true popularity, not mere marketing hype)? Could 
the music of a serious contemporary composer be ahead of the popular 
times, similar to the way Tesla (with his AC power and fluorescent 
light) was ahead of the popular Edisonian (DC-incandescent) times? Where 
does truly innovative music separate from idiosyncratic music 
understandable only by the composer and a few others? Or, does it really 
matter? All music is subjective anyway, a matter of taste, right, or not?


Monart

_________________________________________________________________________

-------- Original Message --------

There was one paragraph that I "balked" at:

"The use of a score is unthinkable in a rock concert; the inability to read music is worn as a badge of honor. Performances are made to appear spontaneous, with much pretense of improvisation. Nothing is to appear to have been rehearsed virtuosity must seem inborn and not acquired."

That's not entirely true. I distinctly remember the awful catch-phrase... "classically trained" as it pertains to guitar players, in particular. It was borne out of a "renaissance" of arpeggio and scale festivals in the late 80s, early 90s. That was, in every way, a "badge of honour".

This is a common line of argument but I see it somewhat differently. 
The bourgeois argument may have held true for a certain time in the 
early 20th century, but I don't think it's particularly true anymore.

What we see in all areas of human knowledge starting in the late 19th 
century is an ever-increasing specialization. In the time of Mozart, a 
"scientist" was also a mathematician, a physicist, a philosopher, a 
chemist, a biologist, and many other things that we now have separate 
disciplines for. Why should we expect the arts to maintain some kind of 
18th century universality when everything from math to science, 
politics, business, and what have you has become increasingly 
specialized?

The smaller and smaller audiences phenomenon is not just a problem in 
new classical music, but also in pop music. Jazz, which was a popular 
style some 60 years ago, has been completely "classicized" by this 
process. Even rock music is moving in that direction--it's been a good 
many years (in pop music terms) since hip-hop artists started taking 
over the top 10 charts. This is not something we can or should 
fight--popularity is no longer an important criteria in determining the 
value of human achievements.

In short, I don't think it's possible to write "serious" music that is 
popular. Serious music doesn't mean today what it meant 50 years ago, 
or 100, or 150 years ago. It is a specialized field, sort of an 
artistic equivalent to research. It's still important; ideas from art 
music make their way into the general consciousness bit by bit. Look at 
Sabotage by the Beastie Boys: the harmony is based on major and minor 
9ths over a pedal. Our music will never attract mass audiences though, 
even with all the musical education you could want. Cancer researchers 
make drugs for people with cancer. You wouldn't expect an accountant to 
pick up an article on the latest cancer drugs just for the fun of 
reading it. You would expect someone working in medicine to do that, or 
someone who is very ill, or someone who is interested in the ethical 
aspects of the latest cancer treatments.

Aaron

______________________________________________________________________

-------- Original Message --------

"The use of
a score is unthinkable in a rock concert; the inability to read music
is worn as a badge of honor. Performances are made to appear
spontaneous, with much pretense of improvisation. Nothing is to appear
to have been rehearsed virtuosity must seem inborn and not acquired."

I had the pleasure of being one of the percussionists on a Rock
Concert at  Massey Hall where a full  Orchestra backed up the Rock
Band 'Tea Party'.  

The only thing that made this 'not my cup of tea' was that the decibel
level measured onstage was greater than that of a jumbo jet taking off
from your head.  

I was delighted that they were passing around mints to the players. 
When the box reached me I was disappointed to find that they were ear
plugs.  Not so disappointed after the rehearsals began.  

Regarding small audiences for abstract music, art, poetry,
experimental dance (as opposed to Riverdance) and other contemporary
forms of expression and thought,

it's difficult, it requires participation, serious attention, struggle
and a dialogue with history.  For those that want to be simply
entertained, don't go there. Turn on the TV or ask Microsoft or go to
the i-tunes store.  There are plenty of people who want to tell a
person what to buy and how to live.  The larger the market, I mean
audience, the better.  The quick fix is often the best thing after a
long day at the office.  I am not being cynical.  When someone wants
something more, a richer, deeper, challenging experience, then they
will seek it and usually find it.  A composer will write music
regardless.  Sometimes there is a cross over.  Music that entertains
on a lighter or more sentimental (emotional) level.  No problem.  But
let's not make that the rule. My Two New Cents...


Rick Sacks

http://www.vex.net/rikscafe

-------- Original Message --------

I think the fashion analogy is a good one, and you might also include
experimental or "art" film as well.  There needs to be an open and public
world of "artists", however that person(s) may define themself, always
trying new, unusual, and not necessarily
accessible/practical/feasible/marketable things, whether that's
experimental, or unpopular, etc.  This stage of experimentation however
should not be cut off from the public, as this is where one will find the
true creative and forward-looking thinking (sorry for thick wording, I'm
trying to stay as generic as possible).  However it should be accepted that
what goes on in this world will never be intended for mass public
consumption, and only rarely will mass public consumption and/or
appreciation occur.  I think the medical analogy someone mentioned a few
days ago fails here, in that there isn't any need (or maybe just no desire
on either end) for medical experimentation and trials to be open to the
public, except insofar as accountability and ethics.  With art, there is
almost always a desire on the part of the artist to share the art with the
public.

It seems to be again be coming down to the old question of what art is.  I
think most people on this list would not consider "new age" music to be art.
I realize there's a ton of assumptions in that last sentence, not just about
the people on this list, but also about the terms "new age" and "art".
<opinion>To me, art is something that should involve two things: innovation
and craft.  Both are as important as the other, and neither need take
precedence.  Innovation in that art should always be doing something new,
creative (root "create") and imaginative, and craft in that it must display
a certain degree of talent, thought and care in construction.  Both
innovation and craft should, but may not always, lead to an expression of
some sort.  The degree to which a piece of art may contain these factors,
among others, is almost always variable, leading to various value judgments
on the art itself.</opinion>

I have had many discussions, some at loud volumes, over these principals,
and my views have changed considerably over the years, but for now that's my
belief.  (wow, that sounds weak - just making the point that over time my
views are sure to evolve.)  In this respect, what I understand to be "new
age" doesn't really fall into the category of art.  Granted I'm not well
schooled in new age, but heavy synthesizers on preset patches, smoke
machines and laser light shows and costumes that have little to do with any
program or story line (yes, I've seen a Yanni video before) seem to cover up
a lack of both craft and innovation in some of that type of music.  There
may be some degree of what I would classify as art in there, but not what I
would consider to be a significant amount.

Ok, flame away :-)

Chris

___________________
www.christienledroit.ca

______________________________________________________________________________

-------- Original Message --------

If I may, my medical analogy was not meant in terms of participating in actual 
trials. I meant it in terms of being informed of the results of medical work. 
In that sense, I see little difference between being informed about "research 
art", whether music or otherwise, and being informed about scientific research. 
Both need to be done even though neither is generally marketable. Both should 
be accessible to the public (although for different reasons), even though a 
mass public appeal is unlikely. To make a more concrete analogy, keeping up 
with medical papers without direct involvement in that line of work is like 
keeping up with new music concerts for someone with no musical background. Not 
very likely to happen.

In terms of fashion pulling its weight and music not, I think this has to do 
with the fact that you can't download your wardrobe off the internet. 
Profitability is a big problem in all genres of music right now... I heard 
someone say recently that the big record companies had just posted a study 
showing that the only items they are making money on now are pop music recorded 
before 1990--music being bought by the older generation who is not generally 
computer-saavy enough to download it. I'm not sure if this is correct, but it's 
an interesting idea.

_________________________________________________________________________



-------- Original Message --------

I'm not sure that the analogy to new concert music and experimentation
holds up these days. In the 1950s and 60s, there was a lot of what we
might call musical experimentation taking place. But quite a few
composers today actually take offense when their music is described as
"experimental." Some even think that term pejorative. John Cage was one
of those.

As for new music appealing only to a specific social group, I'm not
sure that it's true (witness the Winnipeg phenomenon), and I'm certainly
not sure that it's desirable. But finding an audience has been a problem
for our art form since the end of World War I.

_____________________________________________________________________________

-------- Original Message --------

Composers don't have to be contemporary to be short. Michael Haydn's
Symphony in D major, P36, clocks in at 6 minutes and 15 seconds.

Needless to say, composers don't have to be short or long to be interesting,
challenging, engaging, etc. The issue, in music as well as every
communicative art form, is not length per se but length as appropriate to
the task/work at hand. Neither short nor long are intrinsically virtuous but
if the shrinking attention span is not a myth then all of us who communicate
artistically or more prosaically need to reshape our sense of what length is
appropriate to what we are doing.

Barry

"I didn't have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead."
Mark Twain

____________________________________________________________________________

-------- Original Message --------

> And what, pray tell, is "too much money?" I suspect that many 
> composers on
> the list may think that Philip Glass or John Adams make too much 
> money. Or
> even R. Murray Schafer, for that matter. Does that mean they write pop
> music?
>
> Definitions are such a dilemma, aren't they?

Which I why I still think "art as research" (note: NOT "art as 
experimentation") is the best way to think of it. Research, however, 
only in the broadest sense of the word, as in: a sincere search for 
truth for truth's sake. Genres like rock and classical, or categories 
like this much money or that length, all fail at distinguishing "pop" 
and "serious" music because they all focus on material and technique. I 
think that in the end, only intent can separate different kinds of art.

Striving to write a good piece that is fulfilling to oneself as a 
composer falls within this category of research, regardless of material 
or technique. This is art. Writing a piece using what you think is the 
most fashionable or palatable or "correct" set of materials and 
techniques, regardless of if your audience consists of teenage girls or 
university composition professors, is craftsmanship (aka pop?). Of 
course any piece of art will cross into both camps at some point, but I 
do think that there is a worthwhile distinction to be made between the 
intent to advance "human knowledge" (in the broadest sense of 
knowledge) and the intent to create a product with pre-existent 
knowledge.

Therefore, the music of any musician sincerely striving to advance 
human knowledge through music will eventually reach a point (as his/her 
understanding of human knowledge increases in scope and breadth) where 
his/her music is not accessible to the majority of people. To 
purposefully turn one's back on something you know to be true (no 
matter how you know it) can only result in craftsmanship. Note that 
this has nothing to do with material or technique. A musician may 
decide that socio-cultural concerns are the areas of knowledge s/he 
wishes to advance, in which case popular concepts and clichés can 
become techniques in the production of art. The line is drawn when 
something is created for reasons subservient to a sincere search for 
truth for it's own sake, as in, when popular concepts and clichés are 
used for their own sake.

That being said, what's wrong with being a craftsman? Musical craftsmen 
are important, and I think there are a lot of artists that fall into 
that category. Actually we are all craftsmen at some point or another 
in our careers. The problem is that term "artist" is definitely more 
sexy than "craftsman"; hence the confusion over what is serious art and 
what is not.

That's my two philosophical cents for the day.

Aaron
__________________________________________________________________________



-------- Original Message --------

10/8/2003

10/29/2003

FROM:

Music, the Brain, and Ecstasy

Copyright 1977 Robert Jourdain

Avon Books, 1998

From:  Ch. 8 …to listening… pp.260-267

Scholars have attempted to quantify the information content of melodies of different genres of music. This is done partly by counting features like leaps and syncopations, and also by assessing the amount of dissonance in a melody’s underlying harmony. To no one’s surprise, the melodies of much popular music tend to score quite low in information content, which helps explain why so much pop music sounds the same. An extreme case would be the mood-conditioning, utterly featureless music played in supermarkets, music that is written expressly to not draw our attention. Its information content is essentially zero. At the opposite extreme is a good deal of twentieth-century art music that audiences generally detest. In theory, the information content of such music is very high. But whether by inept ears or by inept composition, few people can grasp this music’s deep relations. Studies show that listeners almost always prefer music with too little information over music containing too much. It has also been found that people tend to prefer increasingly complex, information-laden music as they grow older and their listening skills improve. The reverse case, where listeners go from preferring complex to simple music, is virtually unknown.

[…] 

Taste begins with the listener’s notion of the role music should play life. For many people, musical function surpasses all considerations of musical quality. […] 

Moreover, we listen to music for the experience of its meaning, for what it “says” to us. […] Somehow, music expresses things, tells a story. […]

Some social critics have judged the symphony orchestra to be the epitome of capitalist oppression. A strict hierarchy is observed throughout. As ruling aristocrat, the conductor leads compliant musicians, who in turn lead a compliant audience. The orchestra itself is stratified, with the pecking order among the strings clear for all to see. Everything is uniform and formal, from the penguin tuxedos to the prescribed moments of applause. Specialization and expertise reign. The music is written by expert composers and performed by expert musicians. The audience has no part in production; it simply consumes what is offered. In short, the orchestra is a music factory. It is appealing imagery for its often well-heeled audience, relaxing after a long day in their managerial duties.

Neither portrait is very complimentary, and this only goes to show how extreme music’s social symbolism can be. Happily, individuals can be drawn to music in spite of its outward symbolism.

Yet despite all these factors, research shows that most people largely make their personal musical choices for reasons that are neither “personal” nor “musical.” Rather, they listen to conform, taking on music as an emblem of social solidarity with their peers, each generation adopting its own conspicuously different styles. There are many exceptions of course, but the gross statistics are damning. Most people acquire their musical taste during adolescence among friends of the same age, and they carry early preferences right through to the grave. This powerful force overrides considerations of individual neurology and personality. It is a shocking observation, or at least ought to be, given the complexities of music perception. By all rights, any group of twenty teenagers ought to prefer twenty kinds of music.

It’s fair to object that every generation confronts a different world, and with a different perspective that becomes embodied in new music. The rustic naïveté of the beer hail polka is long gone, and so is the optimistic worldview of the Las Vegas crooners. But history does not stand still; the world goes tight on changing through our individual lives, and we change with it. Forests have fallen to print a vast literature or the psychology of life stages. Yet as much as we change with age, out musical taste generally remains stagnant. Most of us stick with what we know, much as we do with the sorts of food we eat and clothes we wear. Dumb habit is the main reason, of course. But habit alone does not entirely explain our listening habits. We are also made narrow by approaching music too passively. By shunting music to the background, we do not meet and overcome new perceptual challenges, and so discover nothing new.

[…] Thus expert listening is always effortful. Compared to more passive listening, it is the difference between watching a dance from the sidelines and taking part. It may be work, but is a joyous expenditure of energy.

Happily, any ear can learn to probe deeper if only an effort is made. It’s not always easy. […]

The time for crossover, a melding of traditional genres, was the 1970's, not
now. We live in a time of absolutism, purism.

Remember the surprise elicited when Carlick opened for the FLOATING WORLD
show at the Music Gallery? The 2NH list faithful had virtually forgotten the
rock tradition of the "opening act".

In our approved academic system, you study your butt off, get a series of
degrees, take master classes, then suddenly burst out onto the stage as a
full-fledged artist of 25. There's no room for this other tradition of the
opening act. We dismiss it as something that rhythm&blues acts go through.

Likewise, Mills-Cockell has followed his own developmental path for decades,
and paid the price of increasing obscurity. I remember the premiere of his
NEON ACCELERANDO (the original quintet incarnation) back in 1976, at the
Rebecca Cohn. I think that there were perhaps as many as 90 people in the
audience. The army of technical people seemed to outnumber the listeners on
that occasion. 

I figure that JMC was just a wee bit late. Had he pulled off a big gig on
that scale in 1973, he might have filled the arenas. I am surprised at this
new resurgence on his part. The CD-buying audience is just not there any
more.

heck, I might enjoy it, but I'll be just...

A voice in the wilderness

(breathing smog in Scarborough)

JG

__________________________________________________________________________



-------- Original Message --------

-------- Original Message --------

Hi Chris,

You wrote:

>i listened to most of the samples of the "concerto of
>deliverance" on the starship aurora website.  this
>music is rather different from what we customarily
>listen to and discuss here.  i think i detected
>elements of what we call "new age" music.
  
It's unclear what people mean when they say a piece of music is "New 
Age". Sometimes, the label seems to be used as a dismissive device. In 
my research over the years, I've found no clear definition of "New Age" 
music, but the examples given do not include music written before the 
20th C. The examples usually have lush instrumentation (sometimes with 
synthesizers and other electro-acoustic instruments) with melodies 
expressing a modern romantic lyricism. (Some have associated New Age 
with such musicians as Yanni, David Arkenstone, Loreena McKennit, and 
Mike Oldfied.) If there's no clearer definition of "New Age Music" than 
its literal meaning, i.e., music of the new age, then, for short, is it 
just new music (but distinguished from new variations or renditions of 
old music)?

Is New Age music, then, music that expresses ideas of the new age, 
(whatever that may be) and/or expresses age-old ideas in a new-age way? 
If so, then maybe JMC's music, particularly his CONCERTO OF DELIVERANCE, 
could be of the New Age: the new age of a truer understanding of 
reality, a more objective grasp of existence -- a greater benevolence 
and goodwill towards life and humanity.

_____________________________________________________________________

In commemoration of the Centenary of Ayn Rand's birth, February 2, a
page has been created as a tribute to her life and work. You may be
interested in checking it out at
http://www.starshipaurora.com/aynrand100.html


Monart

Thank you for making these selections and posting them, Monart.

It is inspiring to read letters that are so benevolent and respectful.
That the subject is inspiring music, may have affected the tone of the
letters; that we can still hear this music, is a joy and treasure that
we can continue to be grateful for. We can also contemplate the
personalities that created the music and wrote the letters. I think it
can bring us a step closer, in this era, to that kind of benevolence and
reverence ourselves.

Mary Jane


Monart Pon wrote:

>Dvorak: Maestro of Melody. His advice: "More melody. Don't be afraid of it."
>
>Dvorak, as described by musicologist Michael Hoffman:
>
>"In Dvorak there exists this 'ray of sunshine', for his entire vision of
>the world, and all his music, are based on his belief in the beauty of
>life, and on his acceptance of the universe in thankfulness and joy."
>
>The following excerpts are samples of letters from, to, and about Dvorak
>-- written in another era, another culture, where there seems to be more
benevolence, goodwill, and reverence.
>
>
...

Dvorak: Maestro of Melody. His advice: "More melody. Don't be afraid of it."

Dvorak, as described by musicologist Michael Hoffman:

"In Dvorak there exists this 'ray of sunshine', for his entire vision of
the world, and all his music, are based on his belief in the beauty of
life, and on his acceptance of the universe in thankfulness and joy."

The following excerpts are samples of letters from, to, and about Dvorak
-- written in another era, another culture, where there seems to be more
benevolence, goodwill, and reverence.

======


[In a letter to Brahms, 23 January 1878, Dvorak asked to dedicate
his Quartet in D minor, Opus 34, to Brahms.]


Honored Master,

About three weeks ago I set out on my intended journey to Vienna in
order to thank you personally for all the kindness that you have shown
me. I was very sorry that I was not fortunate enough to see you before
you left for Leipzig. I took the opportunity to visit Professor Hanslick
who received me very cordially. At his request, I left a number of my
compositions with your housekeeper and beg you, if you are already back
in Vienna, to be so good as to look them through. At the same time I
take the liberty of inquiring whether you received the Duets with the
German translation and whether it is good.

Mr. Simrock wrote to me a few days ago. He will be pleased to publish
the Duets, only a number of places must be changed for the sake of
declamation.

I have further the honor to inform you that your splendid D minor
Concerto was performed at a concert given recently here in Prague and
was extremely successful. And now I venture, highly honored Master, to
approach you with a request. Permit me, out of gratitude and a deep
respect for your incomparable musical works, to offer you the dedication
of my D minor Quartet.

It would be for me the highest honor I can aspire to and I should be the
happiest of men to subscribe myself as bound to you in eternal gratitude and

Your devoted Servant,

Antonin Dvorak

---


[In a letter to Simrock, dated 5 May, 1878, Brahms wrote again
supporting Dvorak's music.]


I do not know what further risk you are wanting to take with this man. I
have no idea about business matters or what interest there is for larger
works. I do not care to make recommendations, because I have only my
eyes and my ears and they are altogether my own. If you should think of
going on with it all, get him to send you his two string quartets, major
and minor, and have them played to you. The best that a musician can
have, Dvorak has, and it is in these compositions. I am an incorrigible
philistine. I should publish even my own works for the pleasure of it.

In short I cannot say anything more than that I recommend Dvorak in
general and particular. Besides, you have your own ears and business
sense to guide you.


[The friendship between Dvorak and Brahms was steadfast until
Brahms died in 1897.  Dvorak was a devout Catholic and Brahms a lapsed
Protestant, then an agnostic. Dvorak was happily married family man and
Brahms an increasingly crusty bachelor. But both had a similar
passionate lyrical quality in their music.]

---


[On September 11, 1884, when Dvorak conducted his 6th Symphony at
Worcester, England, one of the 1st Violins playing was 27-year-old
Edward Elgar, and in a September 28, 1884 letter to his friend, Percy
Buck, Elgar wrote:]


I wish your could hear Dvorak's music. It is simply ravishing, so
tuneful and clever and the orchestration is wonderful; no matter how few
instruments he uses, it never sounds thin; I cannot describe it; it must
be heard.

---


[On September 12, 1884, after conducting on the previous day the Stabat
Mater at Worcester, England, Dvorak wrote to his wife.]


Yesterday I again had a great day. Stabat Mater in the wonderful and
very large church (4000 people) made a tremendous impression. It was the
finest day of the whole celebrations as everybody here was saying. When
we left the church, everybody was looking at me and everybody would have
liked to shake hands with me and say a few words, which of course was
not possible with such a large number of people. Everywhere I appear,
whether in the street or at home or even when I go into a shop to buy
something, people crowd around me and ask for my autograph. There are
pictures of me at all the booksellers and people buy them only to have
some memento.

---


[After the June 15, 1891 ceremony where Cambridge University conferred a
Doctorate of Music on Dvorak, he wrote:]


I shall never forget how I felt when they made me a doctor in England;
the formalities and the doctors. All the faces so grave it seemed that
no one could speak anything but Latin. I listened to my right and to my
left and did not know where to turn my ear. And when I discovered that
they were talking to me, I could have wished myself anywhere else than
there and was ashamed that I did not know Latin. But when I look back on
it I must smile and think to myself that to compose Stabat Mater is,
after all, better than to know Latin.

---


[On 2 January, 1889, expressing his pleasure at hearing Tchaikovsky's
opera, Eugene Onegin, Dvorak wrote to him.]


Dear Friend,

When you were last in Prague, I promised to write to you about your
opera Onegin. Now not only your request compels me to do so but my
inward desire to tell you all that I felt on hearing the work. I confess
with pleasure that your opera made a very deep impression upon me, an
impression such as I expect from a true work of art, and I do not
hesitate to say that none of your compositions has given me as much
pleasure as Onegin.

It is splendid work, full of warm feeling and poetry, and, at the same
time, worked out to the last detail; in short, this music speaks to us
and penetrates so deep into our soul that it is unforgettable. Whenever
I go to the theatre I feel as if I were in another world.

I congratulate you on this work and pray God you may be spared to give
the world many more such compositions.

With a warm embrace

Your devoted

Antonin Dvorak

---


[In reply, Tchaikovksy wrote on January 19, 1889:]


You cannot imagine how delighted I was with your letter. I value very
highly your opinion of my opera, not only because you are a great
artist, but also because you are a man who is frank and sincere. I am
exceedingly proud and happy that I have been able to deserve a sincere
word of commendation from you, my dear Friend. I thank you once more
from the bottom of my heart.

---


[In pianist Helen Henschel's autobiography, _When Soft Voices Die_, she
related how, when holiday with her mother in Karlovy Vary, she met Dvorak.
With shyness, she approached him:]


"Please may I have your autograph and please would you write a bar of
your music for me."

"Certainly," said Dvorak. "What shall I write?"

"Oh please, the slow movement of the New World Symphony," I said,
emboldened by the kind smile behind the piercing eyes.

As he took up his pen to write, he suddenly looked at me and mused: "Let
me see, now. I don't think I remember just how it goes. Could you help me?"

My shyness disappeared in my eagerness. "Oh Yes, Herr Dvorak. It goes
like this," and I proceeded to sing the whole of the first passage.

"Thank you," he said. "It begins to come back to me and I think I could
write it all if you were to sing it to me once again."

So I did, and it was years before I realized I had been exploited.

---


[In 1886, Janacek dedicated his _Songs for Male Chorus_ to Dvorak. In a
letter dated 13 September, Dvorak wrote in answer:]


Dear Friend,

I received your choral works and send you my thanks, not only for
them, but also for the dedication of which I am very proud and which
gives me great pleasure. As soon as I had opened the parcel, I read them
through several times and I must admit that in many places, especially
with regard to your modulations, I was taken aback and unable to form an
opinion. I did not go straight away to the piano, I did not play them; I
think I understand a thing better, from a theoretical point of view, by
merely reading it. But when I had played them through once, twice, three
times, my ear gradually became accustomed and I said to myself: well,
after all, it may be possible, but we still might argue about it.

That is, however, unimportant. I think they are a real enrichment of our
poor literature (poor in that kind of work). They are original, and what
is most important they breathe forth a truly Slavonic atmosphere.


[Later, commenting on Janacek's score of his operaed opera, Sarka,
Dvorak advised:]

"More melody, don't be afraid of it."


[Janacek later expressed his respect in a simple statement:]

Do you know how it feels when someone else is taking the words from
your mouth? That is how Dvorak has taken his melodies from my heart.

====

From: _Dvorak_, by Neil Butterworth. 1980 Omnibus Press, London

Hello,

I've been occupied the past couple weeks with an unexpected encounter at
SOLO-HQ <http://solohq.com/Forum/SOLOAnnouncements/0003.shtml>,
and, as well as for other reasons, haven't posted here consequently, but
I'll be replying still to Roger on the Melody thread. (Question: Is a
piece of music for solo instrument, like for flute or oboe or voice, good
evidence that melody is the essence of music?)

I'm also reading Roger's interesting notes from his talk at Jeanie
Kennedy's group, and listening to Mike Shapiro's pleasant soundtrack
music he created for the audiobook Anthem. Thanks, Roger and Mike.

An advert for JMC's album Concerto of Deliverance will be appearing in
the next few issues of the Navigator. Look out for it.

- Monart

Ugh! I just looked at the post I sent up on 9/19/04, and it's riddled with
(HTML?) garbage. I have taken the liberty of reformatting the post as plain text
and reposting it. I hope this will help clarify my thoughts by taking out the
unfortunate amount of "noise" it contained. Best to all, Roger Bissell
=============================================================
Dear List Members -- although I have previously stressed my view that melody
is more similar to literary character, while harmonic-rhythmic progression is
more similar to literary plot, I would like to focus here on the very
important role that melodic motion plays in emotion (and goal-directedness) in
music.
About 6 months ago, at Jeanie Kennedy's invitation, I presented a talk on
emotion in music to her discussion group in San Francisco. My revised notes for
this talk are included below. I think you will be able to see how a popular song
provides a lot of "bang for the buck," in terms of a progression of emotional
experience within a 32-measure (or so) passage. There is a lot that can be
said about emotionality in music, before you even get to the large-scale
contribution of harmonic-rhythmic progression. (Of course, rhythm and harmony
are
involved even with the 32-measure song form, but I focus mainly on melodic
"contour," the up and down motion of the melody. Within a major or minor key
setting, as well as a vigorous or laid-back tempo, melody still has a lot of
latitude
for expressiveness. I think one of the most important concepts I discuss
below is Leonard Meyer's notion of "Sisyphean sequences." These really help to
clarify the melody-character analogy. Comments are welcome to these notes. Best
to all, Roger Bissell
========================================
Serious Schmaltz and Passionate Pop:
Are There Objective Indicators of Emotion in Music?
Bay Area talk – March 20, 2004
Revised June 14, 2004

Topic Outline

Personal and introductory
Aesthetics
1.      analysis vs. appreciation
2.      same emotional devices in music as literature
3.      music not sui generis but special case
4.      art as microcosm: subject and style -- static vs. dynamic
5.      dynamic art: poetic, descriptive, narrative – serious vs. popular
6.      emotion in narrative art: character, plot, setting

Music
1. rhythmic accent: location of stress, quantity of beats  Ă  emotion and
character matrix, combinations
2. tonal motion: modal quality, direction of motion Ă  emotion and character
matrix, combinations.

Psychology
1.      why do the devices work?
2.      why is the literary-musical analogy overlooked?
3.      empathetic identification (Heider-Simmel)

A. Notes for introductory remarks:

1. A little bit about me: I grew up in the Midwest and went through my
college and Boy Objectivist and Boy Libertarian days in the late 60s and early
70s.
My high school band director gave me a copy of Atlas Shrugged in May of 1966,
but it wasn’t until the fall of 1967, when I read Rand’s essay “The
Wreckage
of the Consensus,” that I became fully conscious and realized I was a “
radical for capitalism,” which I later discovered meant “libertarian.” I
also liked
what she had to say about art and theory of knowledge, and I became convinced
that you could answer just about any intellectual question, if you studied
hard enough and used logic and reason.

2. As a young musician and budding philosopher, I was intrigued with music’s
emotional power, and I wondered how Rand’s ideas about art and value would
apply to music. When she wrote about music in 1969, I was thoroughly
disappointed
and frustrated with her theory and decided that I would have to try to
provide my own explanation of emotion and meaning in music. At about the same
time,
I discovered other, non-Objectivist writers like Leonard B. Meyer and Arthur
Koestler and Suzanne Langer, who said things that helped me form my own
perspective.

3. Then in 1971, Equitarian Associates, a quasi-Objectivist-Libertarian group
centered in Iowa, hired me to write a book on aesthetics, with a special
focus on music. I presented several chunks of this manuscript at Equitarian
conferences around the Midwest in the early 70s, but it wasn’t until 1991 that
I
finished the manuscript. Even then, it wasn’t publishable, except for certain
important sections that have appeared in Objectivity, ART Ideas, Reason Papers,
and Journal of Ayn Rand Studies.

4. I have locked horns in the pages of JARS and at TOC conferences with the
main Objectivist-sympathizing aestheticians, Lou Torres and Michelle Marder
Kamhi, who do not at all like my views of art and music. I have also had the
distinction of having an aesthetics book project pulled out from under me, due
to
financial problems at TOC. So, it’s safe to say that my views are not yet part
of Objectivism, and may never be – which is fine, because I’ve never been an
insider with either of the official leading Objectivist organizations,
anyway. But I’ll keep plugging away, as long as I have friends who edit
journals and
run dinner discussion groups who are willing to let me share my ideas.

5. My view of art as microcosm is the foundation of my presentation, and I
think it makes a lot of sense on a common sense level, but I can’t even begin
to
give you a decent argument for it tonight. I’ll just quickly sketch it out as
we go, and if you’re interested in more details, I’ll refer you to my
forthcoming JARS essay, and to the earlier essays posted on my website.

6. Other resources: before diving into my own treatment of this subject, I
want to briefly recommend some other valuable resources. The reading list I have
handed out contains a number of items, some of which are rather advanced,
some more for the layman. I’m particularly fond of the music lectures by Alan
and
Joan Blumenthal, partly because I agree with the things they say about
musical meaning, but mainly because they’re so well organized and informative
and
accessible to the general listener. Other good books for laymen are two recent
books, Music, the Brain, and Ecstasy by Robert Jourdain and Music and the Mind
by Anthony Storr, and two older ones, The Language of Music by Deryck Cooke
and Music, the Arts, and Ideas by Leonard B. Meyer. Cooke and Meyer are my real
heroes, the ones who have given me the most insight in building my view of
music, and I will be drawing from them in what I say shortly.

B. Aesthetics, especially in re dynamic art forms

1. Analysis and appreciation: because emotion in music is such a difficult
issue, most books and lectures aim at helping us either to analyze or to
appreciate music. Analysis is more technical, using the pitch, harmonic, and
rhythmic
vocabulary that composers and performers use. Appreciation is more for the
layman, focusing on historical and cultural and generally quite simple musical
aspects of the pieces examined. Analysis aims at a scientific understanding of
a piece of music, while appreciation aims at humanistic understanding. Both
approaches ought to be able to provide insight into how emotions are conveyed in
a piece of music, but often analysis avoids such issues as being
non-objective and unscientific, while appreciation deals with emotions by
wallowing around
in a touchy-feely, subjective fashion. I don’t think it’s either-or. Facts
are facts, even about the emotions, and I think we can understand them in
music, as in any other branch of art. My approach, while not overly technical,
tries to identify the devices that convey or evoke certain emotions, and to
explain how they work.

2. Emotional devices in music: There are various devices that composers use
in order to characterize and emotionalize their melodies and progressions, and
these devices are used in both serious music and popular music. They are
almost part of the vocabulary of Western music, but whether these conventions
are
arbitrary or due to powerful metaphors is not always clear. What I want to
focus on tonight is some of the most common devices that lend music its
emotional
meaning, along with some examples from serious and popular music.

3. Sui generis or a special case? Some people object to comparisons of music
to the other arts, saying it’s in a category by itself. I don’t deny that
there are unique features to music, but I think we can better understand music
as
an art by finding the things it has in common with the other arts. I am
suggesting, in other words, that we approach music this evening in the same way
that I think we should approach art in general. What to listen for in music,
then, is a special case of what to look for in art.

4. Art as an imaginary world with subject and style: art presents an
imaginary world of a certain kind. The imaginary world embodies a view of the
world;
that view is its meaning, and the subject and style are the carriers of that
view of the world, so they are the carriers of the artwork’s meaning. Another
word for the meaning of the artwork, is the theme, which unites the subject and
style. The theme or the meaning of the artwork is an emotionally tinged view
of the world, a sense of life. This is a somewhat controversial interpretation
of Rand’s view of art, but it is the gist of my essay “Art as Microcosm”
that
will appear in JARS this summer. It’s my story, and I’m sticking with it!  J

5. Dynamic vs. static art: Art as a general category is divided into two main
categories: static art and dynamic art. Painting, sculpture, and architecture
are static art – sometimes also called spatial or visual art. Literature,
music, and dance are dynamic art – also called temporal art. The temporal arts
have the same two basic features that carry meaning: subject and style. However,
since they are temporal and dynamic, they involve not just things, but things
in motion, or entities and their actions, as Rand would say.

6. Different kinds of dynamic art: not all literature tells a story. Some of
it is just poetic in nature, using rhyme and other techniques in order to
convey its meaning. Some of it is descriptive in nature, using vivid language in
order to convey its meaning. But some of it is goal-directed in nature, using a
logically connected progression of events in order to convey its meaning.
(Some literature uses all of these, of course.) Music is the same way. Some
music
combines two or all three approaches, but most pieces are clearly one of
these three kinds:
(a) Some music is mostly poetic – e.g., the dance forms, sonatas, and
symphonies of the 18th century, as well as many songs throughout history. In
particular, consider Handel’s Messiah or Bach’s third Brandenburg Concerto,
which are
both very interesting pieces, but with “an interest based on elaboration,
symmetry, and rhythmic pulse, rather than upon progress…Dramatic development
has
no part to play.” (Storr 1992) Other examples: Mozart’s Rondo ala Turk and
Dave Brubeck’s Blue Rondo ala Turk. This kind of music primarily conveys
whether
the world is intelligible and whether man can live in harmony with the world.
(Also see Claus Ogerman’s piano concerto.)
(b) Some music is mostly descriptive – e.g., Debussy’s Nocturnes, or Gil
Evans’s Sketches of Spain, or Claus Ogerman’s Cityscapes. They emphasize the
sensuous qualities of sound and are “more like a lyric tableau than a
narrative
action.” Debussy in general tends to avoid goal-directed melodies and harmonic
progressions. (Meyer 1989)
(c) Some music is mostly narrative – e.g., many sonatas, symphonies,
concertos, preludes, nocturnes, etc., etc., etc., even songs of the 19th and
20th
centuries that are experienced by the listener as telling a story. Ironically,
this kind of music, which was most similar in form to the literary novel, was
the
prime force that “encouraged the development of orchestral concerts in which
music was entirely unrelated to words.” This kind of music “provided an
equivalent for dramatic action: a story in sound which had a definable
beginning,
middle, and end…the pattern of contrast, conflict, and final resolution…”
Storr 1992) This kind of music primarily conveys whether man is good and whether
values can be achieved.

7. Telling a story: in literature that tells a story, subject thus has two
aspects: characters and plot, i.e., what people and events the writer presents
to carry his meaning – and style goes right along in parallel: it has
characterization and plot construction, i.e., how the writer carries his meaning
in the
way he presents the people and events. The parallel in music is the musical
motif or melodic idea that is repeated and varied and developed as the music
unfolds – and the process of unfolding of the melody. This is the subject of
music that tells a story. A given melody can be characterized in various ways,
and the development of that melody can be laid out in various ways. This is the
style of music that tells a story.

8. Serious vs. popular: Like narrative literature, narrative music ranges
from long-winded, “serious” art to relatively more bite-sized, “popular”
art. It
’s harder to pack a drama into 5 pages than into 500, or a musical drama into
32 measures than into 320, but it can be done, and this is one way we have of
analyzing and evaluating popular literature or music. Were we swept along in
a compelling series of events, in which something interesting or even moving
happened to people or melodies we were focusing on? Although short, popular
forms can’t hold as much material or go into as much development, a lot can be
learned about the longer forms by looking at the shorter ones. We’ll be
looking
mostly at songs.

9. How emotional states are conveyed in narrative literature and music: there
are three main ways in literature and analogously in music, the first and
third involving empathy:
             (a) literary character: emotions implied by gesture, motion,
stance, expression; musical theme: emotions implied by tonal and rhythmic
tensions
in melody.
             (b) literary setting: mood evoked by description of surroundings;
musical background: mood evoked by harmonic and textural qualities of pitches
used.
             (c) literary plot: emotions evoked by anticipation, delay,
uncertainty, frustration, resolution, fulfillment; musical progression: emotions
evoked in same way by harmonic-melodic progression of events.

C. Emotion in music

10. Tensions between musical tones as basis of emotional expression in music:
The tensions are set up along three dimensions: pitch, rhythm, and volume –
and they are modified by tone color and texture. Texture acts more in the
background as a mood-setting factor, while tone color characterizes the tensions
in
the melody itself. It’s interesting to note that pitch, rhythm, and volume
are analogous to space, time, and mass in physics. Perhaps this is why melodies
seem to be analogous to physical objects in motion and, in particular, to
literary characters.

11. Rhythm is comprised of sequential emphasis of notes (accent) and duration
of notes. Duration relates to tempo (slow-fast), movement (even-jerky), and
phrasing (pointed-smooth). Accent can be irregular or regular, and the latter
can be duple or triple.  Examples of double accented patterns that are very
common in music include iamb (heart beat) and trochee (painting). Examples of
triple accented patterns that are very common in music include anapest (horse
gallop) and dactyl (punching bag). [This section needs to be expanded, showing
two dimensions of rhythm: duple vs. triple and beginning-accented vs.
end-accented, yielding four basic rhythm types. A diagram can be made similar to
the one
included here for melody.]
a. anapest: compare Rossini’s William Tell Overture, Mozart Symphony in G
Minor, Rachmaninoff’s Prelude in G Minor (first section), Dudley Do Right
theme,
Rach. 2nd Symphony (Finale movement), Rach. 2nd Piano Concerto (accompaniment
figure in Finale movement), Chopin Waltz in Eb major.
b. dactyl: compare waltz with hora and tarantella. Also Rach. Prelude in C#
Minor (middle section), Rach. Symphony #2 (second movement), Rach. 2nd Piano
Concerto (first movement), Ogerman Piano Concerto (first movement), Grusin
“Mud
Island Chase.”
c. iamb: examples include Grusin “Mud Island Chase” and main theme of “The
Firm.”
d. trochee: examples include Liszt Hungarian Rhapsody, Grusin “The Plan,”
Rach. Prelude in C#minor (middle section).
e. note: there can be two levels of rhythm, as dactyl with super-level of
trochee in Rach. Prelude in C#minor (middle), as well as sequences alternating
rhythms as iamb and dactyl in Grusin’s “Mud Island Chase,” or dactyl and
trochee in “Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo.
f. note: in general, end-accented rhythms seem more deliberate and
goal-directed, while beginning-accented rhythms seem more frenzied, obsessive,
compulsi
ve (?).

12. Tonal tensions arise from the notes of the scale themselves, as well as
the distance and the direction notes are from each other. Another analogy to
physics: the tension of the notes of the scale is like potential energy, and the
tension of the distance and direction between tones is like kinetic energy.
The distance between notes is measured in terms of how many notes of the scale
lie between them, and the direction between tones is measured in terms of
whether the second tone is higher or lower in pitch than the first, and the
tonal
movement from one note to the next accordingly being referred to as “upward”
or “downward.” According to Cooke, notes of the scale all have their own
emotional implications, either painful if notes belonging to a minor scale,
pleasurable if belonging to a major scale, or neutral if belonging to either
scale.
He also says that upward motion is “asserting” or expressing an “outgoing
emotion,” while downward motion is “accepting” or expressing an
“incoming
emotion.” I prefer to think of them in terms of “investing” and
“cashing-in” (or
out). Or, if you prefer an agricultural metaphor over a financial one:
“reaping
” and “sowing.” Here are some examples:
a. Compare Rossini BOS and Mozart Sym with Chopin funeral march – in re 5 b6
5. Also look at Grieg’s piano concerto in Am minor, in re 5 b6 b7 b6 5 on Am
chord and 5 6 7 6 5 on C chord, connotes burst of anguish and mournfulness,
followed by burst of violent longing for happiness.
b. Compare Shost. Festive Overture 5-1-2-3 to “You Are My Sunshine” and
“How
Dry I Am” and “Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling” (from High Noon) and
“You
Can Fly” (from Peter Pan). Connotes outgoing emotion of joy, pure and simple.
Shost example actually goes
5-1-2-3-1-5-4-3-2-3-1-7-1-6-1-3-2-b6-1-3-2-5-1-6-5-4-3-5-4-3-2-1-7-3-2, which
adds triumph, exuberance, aspiration (1-2-3-4-5)
along with accepting or welcoming blessings, relief, consolation, reassurance,
or fulfillment, with sense of having “come home” (5-4-3-2-1).
c. Consider Tchaik. 1st Pno. Concerto – opening theme, first in minor
5-3-2-1, then major 5-3-2-1. Connotes incoming painful emotion in context of
finality; acceptance of, or yielding to grief; discouragement and depression;
passive
suffering; despair connected with death – suddenly transformed to accepting or
welcoming blessings, relief, consolation, reassurance, or fulfillment, with
sense of having “come home.”

15. Combining the major-minor tensions and the upward-downward tensions, we
can form a four-way matrix, in which we can classify melodies, or parts of
melodies, in terms of their general emotional content. (The four categories in
the
diagram below can be further subdivided as to degree of vigor).

                                     UPWARD MOTION                  DOWNWARD
MOTION
                                     Invest effort, sow
   Receive payback, reap
                                     Outgoing emotion, assertion
Incoming emotion, acceptance
                                     Striving
       Realizing

MAJOR KEY
Pleasure, Joy                    CONFIDENCE
CELEBRATION
Exuberant
                                           [see fuller diagram appended to
this document]
MINOR KEY
Pain, Sorrow                       DEFIANCE
MOURNING
Defiant

16. An additional factor, Sisyphean sequences: when melodic motion is
predominantly one direction, but with partial switchbacks, Meyer calls these
Sisyphean sequences. They can go upward, in which case, the overall effect is
one of
exuberant or defiant striving, depending on whether in major or minor key. Or
they can go downward, in which case the overall effect is one of sweet or
jubilant celebration or bitter or anguished mourning, depending on major vs.
minor
tonality.
a. Examples of exuberant or confident striving: Close to You, Chopin Etude in
E Major, My Heart Stood Still, What Kind of Fool Am I, The Impossible Dream, I
’ve Gotta Be Me, My Way, When I Fall in Love (perform this).
b. Examples of defiant or doubt or grimly determined striving: Rach. Etudes
Tableaux., Rach. Prelude in G minor (first section), Rach. Prelude in C# minor
(first section), C. P. E. Bach piece (Eddie Daniels “Breakthrough” album),
Beethoven “Moonlight Sonata” (third movement).
c. Examples of sweet reflection or jubilant celebration: Namely Me, Early
Autumn, Don’t Know Why, Joy to the World (Handel).
d. Examples of bitter or anguished or wistful mourning: Autumn Leaves, How
Insensitive, A Day in the Life of a Fool, Godfather theme, Nature Boy.

17. Also, these upward and downward motions and sequences can be combined to
give more complex progressions of emotions. Fritz Kreisler’s Liebeslied (Love
Lost) contains sections with wistful mourning and sections with sweet
reflection. Jacques Brel’s Ne Me Quitte Pas (If You Go Away) contains sections
with
anguished mourning and sections with defiant assertion. Tchaikovsky’s 1st
Piano
Concerto opens with three statements of a defiant motif which is then
transformed to a passionately exuberant statement of the same motif in a major
key.
Rachmaninoff’s 18th variation on a theme of Paganini contains phrases with
joyous celebration followed by phrases with passionate assertion, as does
Saint-Saens’ My Heart at Thy Sweet Voice. My Funny Valentine is quite
ambivalent,
swinging between doubt and confidence. More detailed examples:
             a. Rach. 18th Var. on Theme of Pag. – 5-3-4-5-1-2-6-7-1-5-(6 +
repeat) followed by
1-7-1-2-3-4-3-5-2-2-1-2-3-4-5-4-6-3-7-5-6-7-4-1-6-7-8-b3-3-4-5-7-1. First part
is downward positive Sisyphean sequence (fulfillment
punctuated by spurts of excitement). Second part is upward positive Sisyphean
sequence (passionate striving with momentary subsiding). Totally positive.
             b. Saint-Saens The Swan – use melodic curve diagram to show first
1/3 is two downward MSS each followed by straight ascents (to melodic peak),
second 1/3 is two downward MSS (to harmonic and emotional turning point), two
upward mSS (to harmonic and emotional turning point), third 1/3 is one
downward MSS followed by straight ascent, another downward MSS, and a final
upward
MSS. About 86% positive.
             c. Chopin B Minor Scherzo – defiant vs. exuberant (alternating).

18. Harmonic progressions, teleology, triumph or defeat: beyond scope of this
presentation. But see Leonard B. Meyer, Music, The Arts and Ideas.

D. Psychology: why do the musical devices work?

19. Literary-musical analogy: why was this not noticed by Rand and included
in her writings on music? The technical vocabulary of music was not common
knowledge to laymen, including Rand. Also, Rand’s understanding of emotion in
literature was too cerebral, overlooking the role of empathetic identification,
and focusing instead on abstract identification with literary characters. Cite
Heider-Simmel, as discussed in Stephen Pinker’s How the Mind Works and Daniel
Wegner’s The Illusion of Conscious Will. Adults, children, even toddlers
responded to dots in an animated film (c. 1940) as if they were characters in a
story, one striving toward a goal, another trying to interfere with him, yet
another trying to help the first. People tend to project goal-directedness onto
other people and animals, even inanimate objects. If this works strongly with
non-descript dots in an animated film, it can also work with notes in a musical
piece. We identify empathetically with other real or apparent goal strivers,
and we respond as though we were engaged in that behavior or action.

Dear List Members (sorry for these comments being centered) -- although I have previously stressed my view that melody is more similar to literary character, while harmonic-rhythmic progression is more similar to literary plot, I would like to focus here on the very important role that melodic motion plays in emotion (and goal-directedness) in music. About 6 months ago, at Jeanie Kennedy's invitation, I presented a talk on emotion in music to her discussion group in San Francisco. My revised notes for this talk are included below. I think you will be able to see how a popular song provides a lot of "bang for the buck," in terms of a progression of emotional experience within a 32-measure (or so) passage. There is a lot that can be said about emotionality in music, before you even get to the large-scale contribution of harmonic-rhythmic progression. (Of course, rhythm and harmony are involved even with the 32-measure song form, but I focus mainly on melodic "contour," the up and down motion of the melody. Within a major or minor key setting, as well as a vigorous or laid-back tempo, melody still has a lot of latitude for expressiveness. I think one of the most important concepts I discuss below is Leonard Meyer's notion of "Sisyphean sequences." These really help to clarify the melody-character analogy. Comments are welcome to these notes. Best to all, Roger Bissell

========================================

Serious Schmaltz and Passionate Pop:

Are There Objective Indicators of Emotion in Music?

Bay Area talk – March 20, 2004

Revised June 14, 2004

Topic Outline

1. Personal and introductory 
2. Aesthetics 

1.      analysis vs. appreciation

2.      same emotional devices in music as literature

3.      music not sui generis but special case

4.      art as microcosm: subject and style -- static vs. dynamic

5.      dynamic art: poetic, descriptive, narrative – serious vs. popular

6.      emotion in narrative art: character, plot, setting

3. Music

1. rhythmic accent: location of stress, quantity of beats  Ă  emotion and character matrix, combinations

2. tonal motion: modal quality, direction of motion Ă  emotion and character matrix, combinations.

4. Psychology

1.      why do the devices work?

2.      why is the literary-musical analogy overlooked?

3.      empathetic identification (Heider-Simmel)

A. Notes for introductory remarks:

1. A little bit about me: I grew up in the Midwest and went through my college and Boy Objectivist and Boy Libertarian days in the late 60s and early 70s. My high school band director gave me a copy of Atlas Shrugged in May of 1966, but it wasn’t until the fall of 1967, when I read Rand’s essay “The Wreckage of the Consensus,” that I became fully conscious and realized I was a “radical for capitalism,” which I later discovered meant “libertarian.” I also liked what she had to say about art and theory of knowledge, and I became convinced that you could answer just about any intellectual question, if you studied hard enough and used logic and reason.

2. As a young musician and budding philosopher, I was intrigued with music’s emotional power, and I wondered how Rand’s ideas about art and value would apply to music. When she wrote about music in 1969, I was thoroughly disappointed and frustrated with her theory and decided that I would have to try to provide my own explanation of emotion and meaning in music. At about the same time, I discovered other, non-Objectivist writers like Leonard B. Meyer and Arthur Koestler and Suzanne Langer, who said things that helped me form my own perspective.

3. Then in 1971, Equitarian Associates, a quasi-Objectivist-Libertarian group centered in Iowa, hired me to write a book on aesthetics, with a special focus on music. I presented several chunks of this manuscript at Equitarian conferences around the Midwest in the early 70s, but it wasn’t until 1991 that I finished the manuscript. Even then, it wasn’t publishable, except for certain important sections that have appeared in Objectivity, ART Ideas, Reason Papers, and Journal of Ayn Rand Studies.

4. I have locked horns in the pages of JARS and at TOC conferences with the main Objectivist-sympathizing aestheticians, Lou Torres and Michelle Marder Kamhi, who do not at all like my views of art and music. I have also had the distinction of having an aesthetics book project pulled out from under me, due to financial problems at TOC. So, it’s safe to say that my views are not yet part of Objectivism, and may never be – which is fine, because I’ve never been an insider with either of the official leading Objectivist organizations, anyway. But I’ll keep plugging away, as long as I have friends who edit journals and run dinner discussion groups who are willing to let me share my ideas.

5. My view of art as microcosm is the foundation of my presentation, and I think it makes a lot of sense on a common sense level, but I can’t even begin to give you a decent argument for it tonight. I’ll just quickly sketch it out as we go, and if you’re interested in more details, I’ll refer you to my forthcoming JARS essay, and to the earlier essays posted on my website.

6. Other resources: before diving into my own treatment of this subject, I want to briefly recommend some other valuable resources. The reading list I have handed out contains a number of items, some of which are rather advanced, some more for the layman. I’m particularly fond of the music lectures by Alan and Joan Blumenthal, partly because I agree with the things they say about musical meaning, but mainly because they’re so well organized and informative and accessible to the general listener. Other good books for laymen are two recent books, Music, the Brain, and Ecstasy by Robert Jourdain and Music and the Mind by Anthony Storr, and two older ones, The Language of Music by Deryck Cooke and Music, the Arts, and Ideas by Leonard B. Meyer. Cooke and Meyer are my real heroes, the ones who have given me the most insight in building my view of music, and I will be drawing from them in what I say shortly.

B. Aesthetics, especially in re dynamic art forms

1. Analysis and appreciation: because emotion in music is such a difficult issue, most books and lectures aim at helping us either to analyze or to appreciate music. Analysis is more technical, using the pitch, harmonic, and rhythmic vocabulary that composers and performers use. Appreciation is more for the layman, focusing on historical and cultural and generally quite simple musical aspects of the pieces examined. Analysis aims at a scientific understanding of a piece of music, while appreciation aims at humanistic understanding. Both approaches ought to be able to provide insight into how emotions are conveyed in a piece of music, but often analysis avoids such issues as being non-objective and unscientific, while appreciation deals with emotions by wallowing around in a touchy-feely, subjective fashion. I don’t think it’s either-or. Facts are facts, even about the emotions, and I think we can understand them in music, as in any other branch of art. My approach, while not overly technical, tries to identify the devices that convey or evoke certain emotions, and to explain how they work.

2. Emotional devices in music: There are various devices that composers use in order to characterize and emotionalize their melodies and progressions, and these devices are used in both serious music and popular music. They are almost part of the vocabulary of Western music, but whether these conventions are arbitrary or due to powerful metaphors is not always clear. What I want to focus on tonight is some of the most common devices that lend music its emotional meaning, along with some examples from serious and popular music.

3. Sui generis or a special case? Some people object to comparisons of music to the other arts, saying it’s in a category by itself. I don’t deny that there are unique features to music, but I think we can better understand music as an art by finding the things it has in common with the other arts. I am suggesting, in other words, that we approach music this evening in the same way that I think we should approach art in general. What to listen for in music, then, is a special case of what to look for in art.

4. Art as an imaginary world with subject and style: art presents an imaginary world of a certain kind. The imaginary world embodies a view of the world; that view is its meaning, and the subject and style are the carriers of that view of the world, so they are the carriers of the artwork’s meaning. Another word for the meaning of the artwork, is the theme, which unites the subject and style. The theme or the meaning of the artwork is an emotionally tinged view of the world, a sense of life. This is a somewhat controversial interpretation of Rand’s view of art, but it is the gist of my essay “Art as Microcosm” that will appear in JARS this summer. It’s my story, and I’m sticking with it!  J

5. Dynamic vs. static art: Art as a general category is divided into two main categories: static art and dynamic art. Painting, sculpture, and architecture are static art – sometimes also called spatial or visual art. Literature, music, and dance are dynamic art – also called temporal art. The temporal arts have the same two basic features that carry meaning: subject and style. However, since they are temporal and dynamic, they involve not just things, but things in motion, or entities and their actions, as Rand would say.

6. Different kinds of dynamic art: not all literature tells a story. Some of it is just poetic in nature, using rhyme and other techniques in order to convey its meaning. Some of it is descriptive in nature, using vivid language in order to convey its meaning. But some of it is goal-directed in nature, using a logically connected progression of events in order to convey its meaning. (Some literature uses all of these, of course.) Music is the same way. Some music combines two or all three approaches, but most pieces are clearly one of these three kinds:

(a) Some music is mostly poetic – e.g., the dance forms, sonatas, and symphonies of the 18^th century, as well as many songs throughout history. In particular, consider Handel’s Messiah or Bach’s third Brandenburg Concerto, which are both very interesting pieces, but with “an interest based on elaboration, symmetry, and rhythmic pulse, rather than upon progress…Dramatic development has no part to play.” (Storr 1992) Other examples: Mozart’s Rondo ala Turk and Dave Brubeck’s Blue Rondo ala Turk. This kind of music primarily conveys whether the world is intelligible and whether man can live in harmony with the world. (Also see Claus Ogerman’s piano concerto.)

(b) Some music is mostly descriptive – e.g., Debussy’s Nocturnes, or Gil Evans’s Sketches of Spain, or Claus Ogerman’s Cityscapes. They emphasize the sensuous qualities of sound and are “more like a lyric tableau than a narrative action.” Debussy in general tends to avoid goal-directed melodies and harmonic progressions. (Meyer 1989)

(c) Some music is mostly narrative – e.g., many sonatas, symphonies, concertos, preludes, nocturnes, etc., etc., etc., even songs of the 19^th and 20^th centuries that are experienced by the listener as telling a story. Ironically, this kind of music, which was most similar in form to the literary novel, was the prime force that “encouraged the development of orchestral concerts in which music was entirely unrelated to words.” This kind of music “provided an equivalent for dramatic action: a story in sound which had a definable beginning, middle, and end…the pattern of contrast, conflict, and final resolution…” Storr 1992) This kind of music primarily conveys whether man is good and whether values can be achieved.

7. Telling a story: in literature that tells a story, subject thus has two aspects: characters and plot, i.e., what people and events the writer presents to carry his meaning – and style goes right along in parallel: it has characterization and plot construction, i.e., how the writer carries his meaning in the way he presents the people and events. The parallel in music is the musical motif or melodic idea that is repeated and varied and developed as the music unfolds – and the process of unfolding of the melody. This is the subject of music that tells a story. A given melody can be characterized in various ways, and the development of that melody can be laid out in various ways. This is the style of music that tells a story.

8. Serious vs. popular: Like narrative literature, narrative music ranges from long-winded, “serious” art to relatively more bite-sized, “popular” art. It’s harder to pack a drama into 5 pages than into 500, or a musical drama into 32 measures than into 320, but it can be done, and this is one way we have of analyzing and evaluating popular literature or music. Were we swept along in a compelling series of events, in which something interesting or even moving happened to people or melodies we were focusing on? Although short, popular forms can’t hold as much material or go into as much development, a lot can be learned about the longer forms by looking at the shorter ones. We’ll be looking mostly at songs.

9. How emotional states are conveyed in narrative literature and music: there are three main ways in literature and analogously in music, the first and third involving empathy:

            (a) literary character: emotions implied by gesture, motion, stance, expression; musical theme: emotions implied by tonal and rhythmic tensions in melody.

            (b) literary setting: mood evoked by description of surroundings; musical background: mood evoked by harmonic and textural qualities of pitches used.

            (c) literary plot: emotions evoked by anticipation, delay, uncertainty, frustration, resolution, fulfillment; musical progression: emotions evoked in same way by harmonic-melodic progression of events.

C. Emotion in music

10. Tensions between musical tones as basis of emotional expression in music: The tensions are set up along three dimensions: pitch, rhythm, and volume – and they are modified by tone color and texture. Texture acts more in the background as a mood-setting factor, while tone color characterizes the tensions in the melody itself. It’s interesting to note that pitch, rhythm, and volume are analogous to space, time, and mass in physics. Perhaps this is why melodies seem to be analogous to physical objects in motion and, in particular, to literary characters.

11. Rhythm is comprised of sequential emphasis of notes (accent) and duration of notes. Duration relates to tempo (slow-fast), movement (even-jerky), and phrasing (pointed-smooth). Accent can be irregular or regular, and the latter can be duple or triple.  Examples of double accented patterns that are very common in music include iamb (heart beat) and trochee (painting). Examples of triple accented patterns that are very common in music include anapest (horse gallop) and dactyl (punching bag). [This section needs to be expanded, showing two dimensions of rhythm: duple vs. triple and beginning-accented vs. end-accented, yielding four basic rhythm types. A diagram can be made similar to the one included here for melody.]

a. anapest: compare Rossini’s William Tell Overture, Mozart Symphony in G Minor, Rachmaninoff’s Prelude in G Minor (first section), Dudley Do Right theme, Rach. 2^nd Symphony (Finale movement), Rach. 2^nd Piano Concerto (accompaniment figure in Finale movement), Chopin Waltz in Eb major.

b. dactyl: compare waltz with hora and tarantella. Also Rach. Prelude in C# Minor (middle section), Rach. Symphony #2 (second movement), Rach. 2^nd Piano Concerto (first movement), Ogerman Piano Concerto (first movement), Grusin “Mud Island Chase.”

c. iamb: examples include Grusin “Mud Island Chase” and main theme of “The Firm.”

d. trochee: examples include Liszt Hungarian Rhapsody, Grusin “The Plan,” Rach. Prelude in C#minor (middle section).

e. note: there can be two levels of rhythm, as dactyl with super-level of trochee in Rach. Prelude in C#minor (middle), as well as sequences alternating rhythms as iamb and dactyl in Grusin’s “Mud Island Chase,” or dactyl and trochee in “Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo.

f. note: in general, end-accented rhythms seem more deliberate and goal-directed, while beginning-accented rhythms seem more frenzied, obsessive, compulsive (?).

12. Tonal tensions arise from the notes of the scale themselves, as well as the distance and the direction notes are from each other. Another analogy to physics: the tension of the notes of the scale is like potential energy, and the tension of the distance and direction between tones is like kinetic energy. The distance between notes is measured in terms of how many notes of the scale lie between them, and the direction between tones is measured in terms of whether the second tone is higher or lower in pitch than the first, and the tonal movement from one note to the next accordingly being referred to as “upward” or “downward.” According to Cooke, notes of the scale all have their own emotional implications, either painful if notes belonging to a minor scale, pleasurable if belonging to a major scale, or neutral if belonging to either scale. He also says that upward motion is “asserting” or expressing an “outgoing emotion,” while downward motion is “accepting” or expressing an “incoming emotion.” I prefer to think of them in terms of “investing” and “cashing-in” (or out). Or, if you prefer an agricultural metaphor over a financial one: “reaping” and “sowing.” Here are some examples:

a. Compare Rossini BOS and Mozart Sym with Chopin funeral march – in re 5 b6 5. Also look at Grieg’s piano concerto in Am minor, in re 5 b6 b7 b6 5 on Am chord and 5 6 7 6 5 on C chord, connotes burst of anguish and mournfulness, followed by burst of violent longing for happiness.

b. Compare Shost. Festive Overture 5-1-2-3 to “You Are My Sunshine” and “How Dry I Am” and “Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling” (from High Noon) and “You Can Fly” (from Peter Pan). Connotes outgoing emotion of joy, pure and simple. Shost example actually goes 5-1-2-3-1-5-4-3-2-3-1-7-1-6-1-3-2-b6-1-3-2-5-1-6-5-4-3-5-4-3-2-1-7-3-2, which adds triumph, exuberance, aspiration (1-2-3-4-5) along with accepting or welcoming blessings, relief, consolation, reassurance, or fulfillment, with sense of having “come home” (5-4-3-2-1).

c. Consider Tchaik. 1^st Pno. Concerto – opening theme, first in minor 5-3-2-1, then major 5-3-2-1. Connotes incoming painful emotion in context of finality; acceptance of, or yielding to grief; discouragement and depression; passive suffering; despair connected with death – suddenly transformed to accepting or welcoming blessings, relief, consolation, reassurance, or fulfillment, with sense of having “come home.”

15. Combining the major-minor tensions and the upward-downward tensions, we can form a four-way matrix, in which we can classify melodies, or parts of melodies, in terms of their general emotional content. (The four categories in the diagram below can be further subdivided as to degree of vigor).

                                    UPWARD MOTION                  DOWNWARD MOTION

                                    Invest effort, sow                          Receive payback, reap

                                    Outgoing emotion, assertion          Incoming emotion, acceptance

                                    Striving                                        Realizing      

MAJOR KEY

Pleasure, Joy                    CONFIDENCE                            CELEBRATION

Exuberant

                                          [see fuller diagram appended to this document]

MINOR KEY

Pain, Sorrow                       DEFIANCE                                  MOURNING

Defiant

16. An additional factor, Sisyphean sequences: when melodic motion is predominantly one direction, but with partial switchbacks, Meyer calls these Sisyphean sequences. They can go upward, in which case, the overall effect is one of exuberant or defiant striving, depending on whether in major or minor key. Or they can go downward, in which case the overall effect is one of sweet or jubilant celebration or bitter or anguished mourning, depending on major vs. minor tonality.

a. Examples of exuberant or confident striving: Close to You, Chopin Etude in E Major, My Heart Stood Still, What Kind of Fool Am I, The Impossible Dream, I’ve Gotta Be Me, My Way, When I Fall in Love (perform this).

b. Examples of defiant or doubt or grimly determined striving: Rach. Etudes Tableaux., Rach. Prelude in G minor (first section), Rach. Prelude in C# minor (first section), C. P. E. Bach piece (Eddie Daniels “Breakthrough” album), Beethoven “Moonlight Sonata” (third movement).

c. Examples of sweet reflection or jubilant celebration: Namely Me, Early Autumn, Don’t Know Why, Joy to the World (Handel).

d. Examples of bitter or anguished or wistful mourning: Autumn Leaves, How Insensitive, A Day in the Life of a Fool, Godfather theme, Nature Boy.

17. Also, these upward and downward motions and sequences can be combined to give more complex progressions of emotions. Fritz Kreisler’s Liebeslied (Love Lost) contains sections with wistful mourning and sections with sweet reflection. Jacques Brel’s Ne Me Quitte Pas (If You Go Away) contains sections with anguished mourning and sections with defiant assertion. Tchaikovsky’s 1^st Piano Concerto opens with three statements of a defiant motif which is then transformed to a passionately exuberant statement of the same motif in a major key. Rachmaninoff’s 18^th variation on a theme of Paganini contains phrases with joyous celebration followed by phrases with passionate assertion, as does Saint-Saens’ My Heart at Thy Sweet Voice. My Funny Valentine is quite ambivalent, swinging between doubt and confidence. More detailed examples:

            a. Rach. 18th Var. on Theme of Pag. – 5-3-4-5-1-2-6-7-1-5-(6 + repeat) followed by 1-7-1-2-3-4-3-5-2-2-1-2-3-4-5-4-6-3-7-5-6-7-4-1-6-7-8-b3-3-4-5-7-1. First part is downward positive Sisyphean sequence (fulfillment punctuated by spurts of excitement). Second part is upward positive Sisyphean sequence (passionate striving with momentary subsiding). Totally positive.

            b. Saint-Saens The Swan – use melodic curve diagram to show first 1/3 is two downward MSS each followed by straight ascents (to melodic peak), second 1/3 is two downward MSS (to harmonic and emotional turning point), two upward mSS (to harmonic and emotional turning point), third 1/3 is one downward MSS followed by straight ascent, another downward MSS, and a final upward MSS. About 86% positive.

            c. Chopin B Minor Scherzo – defiant vs. exuberant (alternating).

18. Harmonic progressions, teleology, triumph or defeat: beyond scope of this presentation. But see Leonard B. Meyer, Music, The Arts and Ideas.

D. Psychology: why do the musical devices work?

19. Literary-musical analogy: why was this not noticed by Rand and included in her writings on music? The technical vocabulary of music was not common knowledge to laymen, including Rand. Also, Rand’s understanding of emotion in literature was too cerebral, overlooking the role of empathetic identification, and focusing instead on abstract identification with literary characters. Cite Heider-Simmel, as discussed in Stephen Pinker’s How the Mind Works and Daniel Wegner’s The Illusion of Conscious Will. Adults, children, even toddlers responded to dots in an animated film (c. 1940) as if they were characters in a story, one striving toward a goal, another trying to interfere with him, yet another trying to help the first. People tend to project goal-directedness onto other people and animals, even inanimate objects. If this works strongly with non-descript dots in an animated film, it can also work with notes in a musical piece. We identify empathetically with other real or apparent goal strivers, and we respond as though we were engaged in that behavior or action.

My thanks to Roger for his answers to my questions arising out of
comparing melody to plot (or not), and for his elaboration of why he
thinks melody is better compared to literary characters. In so doing,
Roger also provided ideas about the elements of the novel and of music,
thus contributing to the topics of this forum, which I appreciate.

I wish I have time now to comment in similar detail, but I do want to
acknowledge that the discussion rests crucially on how one understands
the nature of melody and harmony, and which one is more primary,
essential, and inclusive. Another basic idea to recognize is that an
essential attribute of an existent is not an exclusive attribute. Just
as "a rational animal" isn't all that a human being is, so "having
melody" isn't all that music is. But "being a rational animal" and
"having melody" is what makes a human being and music possible,
respectively. (I hope to continue the discussion soon. Meanwhile, anyone
else, music theorists or practitioners or listeners, please feel welcome
to participate.)


Monart