Live data from Hacker News

Organ Grinding: When the Audience Revolted at Carnegie Hall

theamericanscholar.org

11–20 of 63 posts

Re: Organ Grinding: When the Audience Revolted at Carnegie Hall

#11

I am not a huge fan of so-called minimalist music, though among its prominent composers, Mr. Reich is the one who appeals to me most, and I think his skills have developed considerably since this early work. The boorish, self-centered behavior of certain audience members would have made it very difficult to appreciate anything of the work at its premiere. Unfortunately, this is increasingly so even for public perform…

> The boorish, self-centered behavior of certain audience members would have made it very difficult to appreciate anything of the work at its premiere.

Is it the audiences or the composers & performers who are boorish & self-centred? This quote from the article is a bit revealing: ‘For sure, by tomorrow, everyone in the world is going to know about you and your music.’

Good music isn’t about being known; it’s about good music. No doubt someone could release 40 minutes of flatulence and get everyone talking about it — but that wouldn’t make it good music. When audiences reject music, maybe it’s bad.

Re: Organ Grinding: When the Audience Revolted at Carnegie Hall

#12

It seems like a low grade echo of the more tumultuous premiere of Igor Stravinsky's 'Rite of Spring': http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22691267

That might have been more of a response to the choreography than the music. Earlier in 1913, a performance of Schoenberg's work turned into a riot during the 'Skandalkonzert' in Vienna. Even that, however, may not have been so much about the music as the composer, who apparently behaved haughtily at a previous concert.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skandalkonzert

Re: Organ Grinding: When the Audience Revolted at Carnegie Hall

#13
post #11

I am not a huge fan of so-called minimalist music, though among its prominent composers, Mr. Reich is the one who appeals to me most, and I think his skills have developed considerably since this early work. The boorish, self-centered behavior of certain audience members would have made it very difficult to appreciate anything of the work at its premiere. Unfortunately, this is increasingly so even for public perform…

> The boorish, self-centered behavior of certain audience members would have made it very difficult to appreciate anything of the work at its premiere. Is it the audiences or the composers & performers who are boorish & self-centred? This quote from the article is a bit revealing: ‘For sure, by tomorrow, everyone in the world is going to know about you and your music.’ Good music isn’t about being known; it’s about g…

If the intent was to provoke a hostile reaction, then I would tend to agree, but I think it was a good-faith attempt to make enjoyable music that was not immediately successful, but which had a silver lining for the apparently dejected composer.

If you go to a concert of new works, I think you have a obligation to not interfere with the rest of the audience's attempt to appreciate it, even if you do not.

It seems that the objectors' rejection of the work was not shared by the whole audience, or even a majority.

Re: Organ Grinding: When the Audience Revolted at Carnegie Hall

#15
post #9
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like the way judging if something is or isn't art, or is or isn't music, carries an implication of judging its quality. You can think it's music if you don't enjoy it, think it's bad at what it sets out to achieve, or think it's trite. So I disagree with you on it not being music, there are certainly more conventional pop/rock songs with noisy sections like this piece that don't stop being music when those se…

I have no bone to pick with Reich, but I do think to call something music, the bar is higher than ‘sound made intentionally’.

> I do think to call something music, the bar is higher than ‘sound made intentionally’

That's exactly the kind of questions and feeling people like Steve Reich and John Cage were trying to explore with their music.

What would you say the bar is?

Re: Organ Grinding: When the Audience Revolted at Carnegie Hall

#16
post #10
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no bone to pick with Reich, but I do think to call something music, the bar is higher than ‘sound made intentionally’.

I would argue you are woefully wrong. Much great music is made of sounds only fleetingly able to be considered 'intentional'. A noise that conveys a feeling, no matter that feeling, is music. Sure, I don't sit around jamming to John Cage, but I similarly feel vaugely ambivilant about much pop music. Is it any different? Much good hiphop is atonal, much jazz does not repeat, and much popular techno has but a faint hin…

It’s certainly true you can find musical qualities in almost any noise, but “music” by definition is a purposeful structure or arrangement of sounds to convey an idea or emotion.

That is not to say that all music must follow some prescribed form or another, but the distinction between sound and music is, at a minimum, structure and intent.

And it is also possible to intentionally structure some sounds in a way as to be not music, or unmusic, which is the impression I get listening to Four Organs.

Structured noise can certainly evoke an emotion — in this case for instance, confusion and disgust, and likely this is intentional. It may be an artform but I don’t think the noise is meant to be musical so much as it is meant to provocate.

Re: Organ Grinding: When the Audience Revolted at Carnegie Hall

#17
post #14

I don't know what's the matter with me, but I love this.

nothing at all. I am a huge fan of Reich (and other minimalists) I can appreciate that others may not like it, there are many types of music that I don't like but I would never disparage someone for liking it.

Re: Organ Grinding: When the Audience Revolted at Carnegie Hall

#18
post #3

It’s a long essay, but maybe the YouTube link should appear at the top. Because when you click play and try to listen, you might find yourself feeling quite like they did back in Carnegie Hall. My vote? Noise, not music.

  My vote? Noise, not music.
I've heard the same thing said about EDM, dubstep, metal, alt rock, rap, punk, pop, rock, and rock and roll.

The truth is, any time you try to draw a bright line between what is and isn't a form of art, someone will try to bisect the line in hopes of creating something new and interesting.

I think when teenagers' music starts to sound like noise to me, it just means I'm getting old.

Re: Organ Grinding: When the Audience Revolted at Carnegie Hall

#19
post #6
post #3

It’s a long essay, but maybe the YouTube link should appear at the top. Because when you click play and try to listen, you might find yourself feeling quite like they did back in Carnegie Hall. My vote? Noise, not music.

I don't like the way judging if something is or isn't art, or is or isn't music, carries an implication of judging its quality. You can think it's music if you don't enjoy it, think it's bad at what it sets out to achieve, or think it's trite. So I disagree with you on it not being music, there are certainly more conventional pop/rock songs with noisy sections like this piece that don't stop being music when those se…

I agree. It fills me with sadness that people think they can just decide what music is or isn't. Frankly it doesn't matter what they think.

Re: Organ Grinding: When the Audience Revolted at Carnegie Hall

#20
I have only limited formal music education, but I am an ardent amateur performer and listener. But I agree with the person who ran down the aisle at the 1970 performance, yelling "Stop! I will confess!"

Western music requires rhythm, melody, harmony. (though rhythm may stand nearly on its own.) Beauty can be subjective to a degree (some non-Western cultures do not find dissonant notes to be objectionable in an otherwise harmonious piece) but coherence of chord progression and melody are fundamental.

This "Four Organs" piece is to my ear a timing algorithm, far less interesting than a perpetual canon ("song in rounds") because it implements only rhythm - melody and harmony are missing. Frère Jacques... no, scratch that, even "Happy Birthday To You" seems a grand compositional achievement by comparison. It is a meager elevation beyond the sort of finger and timing exercises every music student performs -- play a scale in eight notes. Now dotted eights, now triplets, etc. This sort of timing-coherence pattern is pretty common in percussion -- two musicians playing in different time signatures so that the beats periodically align. But the arrogance of four organs playing a monotonous note stretches this simplistic exercise beyond any value, and to raise it up as a great achievement is absurdity equal to the art world's all-black canvas, empty box, or filled rubbish bin.

I'm going to use Rush Limbaugh's definition of art : (paraphrase) "Art is what I can't do. I can throw paint on a canvas. I can glue litter to a floor. I can pound the keys of a piano. That's not art. I cannot carve a statue of David from marble. I cannot paint the Mona Lisa or the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel nor compose an orchestral work. These are all art." [edit: added last sentence]

Post reply on HN