|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.249.84.228
In Reply to: RE: Perhaps I am missing something obvious, but posted by semuta on May 09, 2016 at 18:25:18
runs out?
I recall my first experience listening to Stravinsky's Rite, it was very early in my listening career, and having just come off Grieg and Tchaikovsky (their objectives being quite different than Stravinsky's!) I was sorely disappointed. Where was the grand, full orchestra reprise of the opening bassoon theme at the end of the Rite?? Complete with cascading scales and arpeggios??
Long story longer, it took awhile before I figured out that Stravinsky's objectives were different. Knowing that didn't spoil the mood but rather enhanced my appreciation of piece; it provided the key in.
To give one last example, Debussy's objective--broadly speaking --was to write music that sounds loosely constructed, yet carefully stitched together under the surface. I don't like the music any less for knowing that.
Follow Ups:
That analogy wouldn't work for me. I want the direct experience of art, unfiltered and unanalyzed. When I reflect on the most powerful experiences I have had with art,music in particular, the common denominator was the journey into the unknown.
objectives are different than composer y's.
It's fine not to like composer x on first or second hearing (definitely sound before Wiki, as I've told you know who many times.) But a bit of study has helped me better appreciate certain works, early music, and some 20th Century pieces.
Sometimes the objective is in the title, like Schoenberg's "Farben" (one of his pieces for orchestra) which means "to dye" or "colors". It's easy to complain that the piece doesn't go anywhere but then ah: colors!
Rite of Spring still sounds like an outgrowth of the Romantic era to me, and although I was similarly puzzled by it when I first heard it, I never had to guess what Stravinsky's objective might be in order to establish an emotional connection and attachment to the work. All it took was gaining some familiarity with it.
BTW, I'm not necessarily knocking the quest for finding a composer's objective as an aid to appreciating a particular work. Many roads lead to Rome.
O
it never came.
Brother, I hear you.
If he would have put more harps and soft strings in his music, he would have been a much better composer!
!
Very broad, I would hope. Because I hate boredom in music.
native tongue: it was easy to place them on the highest pedastal, and I have to battle that urge constantly whether listening to Binchois or Boulez.
Edits: 05/10/16
It's the composers job to construct a bridge (of sorts) that leads the listener from pedestal past to pedestal present, while possibly laying the groundwork for pedestal future.It's the reasonable thing to do. And I believe that the reasonable listener will respond accordingly.
Edits: 05/10/16
I loved Fantasia, especially the Stravinsky part, as a four-year old. My first assignment as a six-year old piano student was Bartok's Mikrokosmos. So I guess it depends on where you start.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: