Ha! This isn’t even a legitimate Café Society art criticism Thread, it’s a Pit Thread and yet Czarcasm still feels the need to “win”!
No, Stanislaus! You can’t have had a valuable experience, you just can’t have!!!
Oh, snap.
Someone linked the video on their Facebook page. I watched the entire video. I then immediately composed my OP.
I have never heard of this piece before in my life. So while it may be decades old, it was very new to me.
I attended Quaker meeting within the last month. An entirely different experience.
Put me in with those who don’t understand why people react so negatively to this piece. I’m more or less a full time classical musician (teaching and performing) and the vast majority of references to 4’33" I come across are people complaining about it. Sure, there are occasional performances, but they’re rare, and, should they occur, last all of five minutes (there’s your opportunity to read the program notes). This thing can only possibly affect your life, or your concert-going experience, if you go out of your way to let it.
The balls on these people. It’s really phenomenal.
I suspect that if Batt hadn’t titled the piece after Cage and credited him as a co-writer without paying royalties, the lawsuit wouldn’t have happened. There are many silent tracks on many albums, none of which are attempts to copy Cage, and none have been considered as such legally.
But acknowledging someone as a co-writer and not paying them is clearly wrong.
No, not really. The ability of people to react in an interesting way in response to something mundane does not suggest to me that the “something” is interesting or that it is anything other than mundane.
His description seems perfectly sane. Perhaps “shrug” and “eye-roll” were rather too dismissive of me. Perhaps better to say that the sane person doesn’t have an extreme reaction to it. Anywhere from “ooooooo!” to “meh!” feels about right
That’s pretty much it, as was stated in the link Walton Firm provided.
It seems to me that people acting in an interesting way in response to a thing might in fact be the only way to determine that the thing is interesting.
That makes a cow pie interesting once it is stepped on.
We always experience sound. Even while in an anechoic chamber, Cage still experienced sound from the pulsations of his own body.
Music is not only culturally defined, but it is also individually defined. One person’s annoying noise soundscape is another person’s ambient music. When I lay in a forest in remote wilderness, on in a bunk above a freighter’s engine room, and pay close attention to the soundscape, my act of deliberate listening changes the noise (or lack thereof) into music, for in my reception of it I create meaning that starts with perception and moves to conception.
That’s where 4’ 33” first fails for me, for in and of itself, the soundscape in a concert hall is neither pleasant nor interesting for me. I am already aware that during concert hall performances, people adjust their positions in their seats and some of them cough. For me, when such sounds are made during a concert in which instruments are being played, these sounds are no more than aural embuggerances, and silencing the instruments does not make these sounds anything more than aural embuggerances. Perhaps some folks derive pleasure from random shift and cough sounds, but for me, not so much.
4’ 33” also fails for me in that it strains to make itself into something more than it is. Think of the ambient music in a concert hall as a living, changing thing that the audience experiences. The soundscape changes as people, both audience and orchestra, arrive and chatter as they move into their seats. For the first time the audience focuses its collective sound as it applauds the entrance of the concert master, and in reply for the first time the orchestra focuses its collective sound as it tunes. Then the contrast between sound and silence starts to play a greater role in the soundscape when the conductor enters to (hopefully) loud applause, and the audience goes silent when he or she turns his or her back to the audience so as to join the orchestra. In the moments between the conductor joining the orchestra and the first notes being played, there is silence. Collective, intense and meaningful silence. The start of the orchestra’s formal presentation of the scripted music is not the first notes it plays, but rather it is the silence of its and the audience’s collective attention into which the first note joins.
All 4’ 33” does is draw out that first music of the performance for an annoyingly long time, losing its impact the longer it continues. It clings to the silence the way a poor singer clings too long to a note after breath is exhausted and long after the audience has lost all interest. It draws attention to itself at the expense of whatever else might have been created by the orchestra, leaving one wondering why the orchestra even bothered to attend. It fails (for me, at least) because although it is a meaningful sound based intellectual thought experiment, it is so boring that it not also an enjoyable presentation of ambient music.
Had the final part of 4’ 33" been written to include a lento but gradually accelerating counterpoint of musicians’ occasional snores, burps and sneezes, finishing off with a deep, loooooooong fart by someone planted in the audience, now then you’d have a great work of music. What can I say: I’m nekul’turnyj.
It would be of great interest in a game of cow pie bingo, particularly with the rules pedants.
Q: “Is is still a pie when it is squooshed out of shape?”
A: “No, it is music.”
Q: “Didn’t the music end once it plopped down on the ground?”
A: “The silence after the fall is music too.”
And here all y’all thought there was no high culture in country music.
I only listen to silence ironically.
I bet that John Cage person was a Neo-Nazi. Do we have any conclusive evidence that he wasn’t?
Wouldn’t it be? Maybe unpleasant, but certainly interesting.
It all comes down to the popularity of the artist. Retail bags of cow shit at the garden store go for about a buck a pound, 'cause cows aren’t known for their art, whereas tins of Count Meroni Manzoni di Chiosca e Poggiolo’s shit go for over two and a half million per pound, 'cause he was a popular artistic shitter.
As a lover of music of almost all genres and an amateur musician, I too don’t really get the hate that this gets. I could agree with the argument that it’s not music, it is still an interesting artistic statement and at least qualifies as performance art. The reason I’d agree that it’s not music is that, I think music requires a deliberate ordering of tones on the part of the artist, and while the silence is deliberate, in that silence, the ambient noise dominates, and thus I’d argue that it stops being about the deliberate act of the artist and more about those uncontrolled aspect, which is fine as art, I just think it stops qualifying as music then.
That said, while I could also agree that it’s pretentious, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, and I’d think anger toward it is a bit late, I think it’s still relevant today. In a world now where we’re even more accustomed to having our senses bombarded, actively listening to the ambient sounds around us draws our attention to this. That this piece is drawing the sort emotional and intellectual responses that it has been, I think shows that it’s at least an evocative piece, even if it’s not particularly creative.
Let’s look at it from another perspective.
Some folks leave the radio (or TV) on all the time without actually listening to it. It is ambient noise for them. When used this way is it still music, or must it be actively listened to (as opposed to just being aural background fuzz) for it to be music?