Marcus Maroney - Sounds Like New

Delusions of Grandeur?

From yesterday's All Things Considered:

"Lazlow Jones, the GTA [Grand Theft Auto] writer-director, says he's gotten frustrated with the level of outrage that surrounds the game. But on another level, he understands that sometimes it takes a while for the public to recognize greatness in its midst. He points to the debut of Igor Stravinsky's ballet score The Rite of Spring, which scandalized Paris in 1913.

'The entire hall erupted into a riot,' he says, 'and there were politicians and people calling for it to be banned, because it was some kind of hedonistic thing that was certainly not art.'

A hundred years later, Jones observes, we look back on The Rite of Spring as one of the great compositions of the 20th century.

So Jones, for one, is taking the long view on Grand Theft Auto."

Read or listen to the whole thing here.

Juventas! Podcast

The wonderful Boston-based new music group Juventas! has its podcast up and running.  Included are interviews with composers they've performed (all under age 35) as well as clips from live performances.  Please given them a visit!

Thank you, serialists.

Much has been floating around the blogosphere the New York Time's misguided Bernard Holland column on George Perle .  The article is so poorly argued that I feel bad criticizing it. 

"It sounds reasonable to say that Anton Webern’s Piano Variations take up where Brahms left off...I don’t think it has anything remotely to do with Brahms."  Actually, taken out of the continuum of Western musical history, it doesn't sound reasonable to me to say Webern's Op. 27 picks up where Brahms "left off".  That work picks up where Webern's own prior works (notably, of course, the variations movement of Op. 21) left off.  The link to Brahms happens at the beginning of Webern's career.  It's reasonable to say that the Passacaglia picks up where Brahms "left off" - for me the connection to the finale of Brahms' fourth symphony is clear.  Holland over-simplifies his discussion by presuming that two pieces with the same title will automatically be connected.   Yes, it does take a bit of work if one wants to really explore where the connections lie, but they are clearly there, and they truly do make sense with familiarity.  The move from late Brahms/Wagner/Mahler to early Schoenberg/Berg/Webern is easy to see.  The move from there to Schoenberg and Berg's aphoristic pieces is clear.  The move from those to Webern's work is clear.  The move from there to Perle's work is clear.  If you take the shortcut, as Holland wants to do, then, yes, you run the risk of getting lost. 

Is it necessary to make those connections to enjoy Perle or Webern?  Of course not.  One must turn off their "tonal filter" and open their ears to a language other than that to which they were born.  Yes, it's a challenge, and it can be uncomfortable.  Great art should make us uncomfortable from time to time.  Holland says that music prior to the 20th century wanted "to come down where it started."  I for one don't want to come down where I started.  If I take a trip, I want to end up somewhere spectacular, different, exotic.  Otherwise, what's the point?

I want to thank the Schoenbergs, Weberns, and Perles out there.  I want to thank them for:

• Frank Martin's 12-note passacaglias.
• Barber's Piano Sonata
• Britten's Turn of the Screw
• Stravinksy's Agon, Requiem Canticles and Threni
• Copland's Piano Variations, Fantasy for Piano
• Dutilleux's eloquent use of tone-rows and all-interval tetrachords in his music.
• Lutoslawski's integration of aggregate manipulation into his stunning Third Symphony, among other works.
• Per Nørgård’s use of the infinity series.
• Pierre Boulez's shimmering works of late.
• Ligeti, whose study of serialism undoubtedly led to his own personal style.
• Dallapiccola and Nono.
• Reactions against serial music, including Minimalism and "New Romanticism".

Sorry, Mr. Holland, the "explorers" will not be forgotten, at least not by those who truly care.