tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2126088657007089941.post6891114645928563660..comments2023-03-31T00:00:32.898-04:00Comments on Music As Weapon?: Painting Yourself Into a CornerDTLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11675490178570009564noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2126088657007089941.post-73943511004168576072009-07-06T00:34:48.058-04:002009-07-06T00:34:48.058-04:00i like what you're saying.
it's interest...i like what you're saying. <br /><br />it's interesting that you wonder if andriessen's works often leave audiences disappointed because they aren't ranty or because they lack univocality. i agree with you, in that these traits almost always turn me off to a piece of music too, but i never thought of audiences as clamoring for this kind of experience from andriessen's music. but maybe you're right - not that the music would be better liked if it peddled blunter political messages, only that it would be more digestible. the complexities of a piece like "de staat" do take time and effort to really think about, and maybe that's why it isn't performed that often. (or maybe it's because of the 4 oboes.) it's so hard to direct people's thoughts into the current world without gettin' preachy.<br /><br />this post also made me look up andriessen's comments about de staat, which i totally love. not only that he wrote the piece as a contribution to the debate itself, but also that while "abstract musical material - pitch, duration, and rhythm - are beyond social conditioning... the moment the musical material is ordered it becomes culture and hence a social entity." <br /><br />maximo nerd that i am, that quote gets me all fired up. it seems to go along with commenter John K's broad definition of the scope of "political music" - one i think people should entertain, and one that hopefully your diss will help foster. i think sometimes we close ourselves off from worlds of meaning when we believe music falls into hard categories of "political" or "not-political" (or "abstract"/"not-abstract" for that matter) - and there are endless cultural connections to be made if we accept music as part of a much more fluid spectrum.tedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12852683199547118329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2126088657007089941.post-37760736692722463232009-07-03T00:24:03.134-04:002009-07-03T00:24:03.134-04:00I agree, David. For Andriessen, the “dissonance” o...I agree, David. For Andriessen, the “dissonance” of Worker’s Union is part of its political and social beauty, not a musical posture. The resulting harmonies, and any efforts of the performers to change and adapt their harmony is part of the political and social process of the work. It is totally akin to the Cardew pieces where one evolves harmonies in relation to the group, and where dissonance of all kinds is appreciated for its beauty.<br /><br />I would be very interested to know more about your dissertation and how you define the scope of political music. Much of the most successful political music for me is among the most abstract, such as Wolff and late Cage, in which social construct is revealed metaphorically through music. My impression is that Cardew was very influential in this regard, in helping evolve the notion of “political music” past the Eisler construct, so that method and form, and less the overt message, imbues a work with political philosophy. We protest through our form.john khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03524813889807146163noreply@blogger.com