12 Dec
2006
12 Dec
'06
5:15 p.m.
Atte André Jensen wrote:
--
http://www.cesaremarilungo.com
Cesare Marilungo wrote:
In these discussions
we have to consider how, when and why we listen to
what we consider music. And how it was meant to be listened to.
Obviously, if I have to decide what to put on my mp3 player for a trip
I'd rather put Miles Davis 'Kind of blue' or, even better, my whole
collection of the 70ies canterbury scene than John Cage.
Listening to Cage to me is more like reading a book about zen
philosophy. Nonetheless, I'm listening to a record, or better to a
performance.
Incidentally, Cage works are far more interesting as an artistic
statement while most popular music act as a way to trigger certain
emotions (and that's what most call music). The latter is somewhat
instrumental. I listen to 'Kind of blue' when I want to be consoled,
when I'm sad. When I'm programming I prefer 'Bitches brew'. :-)
c.
4' 33" was intended as a performance
piece, so the noise made by the
audience emerged as music, probably in a way that automatically
follows certain rules. So it is much more a generative technique than
a provocation.
I understand that. It's just not music (at least to me)... That's why a performance of Cage 4'
33" is more musical (and for me
it is art, too) than 4' 33" of any sound whatsoever.
Ok...