The Best Rapper Alive

Lil’ Wayne was simply known as one of the most famous rappers of our time until he declared himself to be more. On December 6, 2005 Lil’ Wayne released his album “The Carter II” and claimed to be the best rapper alive on a song titled “Best Rapper Alive”. After he made this statement much debate arose to the discussion as to if this was in fact a true statement or merely an overly inflated ego grown out of control. Since the time of the album’s release he has collaborated with practically every famous hip-hop, R and B, and Pop and artists of other genres including Enrique Iglesias(Latin Pop), Jason Mraz(Indie Rock), Weezer(Alternative Rock), and even Madonna. Naturally being so exposed across so many different platforms of music (his album titled “Rebirth” is in even in the style of rock), he is very easily recognized all around the world.

The reason this is important is because a very good lesson can be learned from this. What if Classical music were to be approached in the same sense in which Lil’ Wayne approached his career. To declare it as the best music around and to spread its influence across every musical and cultural platform possible until everyone had no choice, but to listen to its voice. As many people say these days, “Is there any song Lil’ Wayne isn’t in?” to which one could respond, “Yes. One that people don’t know”.

More Information about Lil' Wayne.

Essentializing

Definition of ESSENTIALIZE

: to express or formulate in essential form : reduce to

Anosognosia

Errol Morris's chilling New York Times series on unknown unknowns, mentioned today in class.

Nkosi Sikeleli Africa videos

Hey all,

I thought this would be helpful in light of our Cook readings.

This is a traditional version of the song before it became the national anthem.

This is the official national anthem version as sung at the Rugby World Cup in 2007.

Even though it's the same music, these versions feel quite different. I feel like the latter version has been "Anglicized" - it sounds much more like a European chorale or hymn than a traditional South African song. What do you think?

Enjoy!
Dave

Symphony Hall Organ

I will admit that this is copied from a summary of the organ, but it seemed all too perfect and concise:

The Symphony Hall organ, a 4,800-pipe Aeolian-Skinner (Opus 1134) designed by G. Donald Harrison, installed in 1949, and autographed by Albert Schweitzer, is considered one of the finest concert hall organs in the world. It replaced the hall's first organ, built in 1900 by George S. Hutchings of Boston, which was electrically keyed, with 62 ranks of nearly 4,000 pipes set in a chamber 12 feet deep and 40 feet high. The Hutchings organ had fallen out of fashion by the 1940s when lighter, clearer tones became preferred. E. Power Biggs, often a featured organist for the orchestra, lobbied hard for a thinner bass sound and accentuated treble.
The 1949 Aeolian-Skinner reused and modified more than 60% of the existing Hutchings pipes and added 600 new pipes in a Positiv division. The original diapason pipes, 32 feet in length, were reportedly sawed into manageable pieces for disposal in 1948.
In 2003 the organ was thoroughly overhauled by Foley-Baker Inc., reusing its chassis and many pipes, but enclosing the Bombarde and adding to it the long-desired Principal (diapason) pipes, adding a new Solo division, and reworking its chamber for better sound projection.


Æolian-Skinner Organ Company, Inc. — Æolian-Skinner of Boston, Massachusetts was an important American builder of a large number of notable pipe organs from its inception as the Skinner Organ Company in 1901 until its closure in 1972. Key figures were Ernest M. Skinner (1866-1960), Joseph Whiteford, and G. Donald Harrison (1889-1956). The company was formed from the merger of the Skinner Organ Company and the pipe organ division of the Æolian Company in 1932.


Here is a link to photos taken when the organ was re-built in 2003.

Interesting Statistics

Kind of random, but a friend of mine posted this article on Facebook and I found it interesting. Make sure you scroll down to occupation number 1 on the list!

Performance Practice

There are experts who have read everything about certain performance practices, and have developed an opinion on how to play certain kinds of "classical" music, like the Baroque period. The biggest debate among many musicians is how to play certain pieces of music. Most classically trained musicians want to play with the correct style that each piece fits in. There are certain ways to ornament notes, and there are certain ways to articulate notes so it sounds like a piece from the Baroque era. Some musicians may think that you start with the trill with the above note, or start the trill with the lower note. How would one truly know how certain pieces were played? There are no recordings of the pieces from that period of time, and there is no one who lived during that era that is alive. It is really hard to say what is correct or incorrect.

I immediately thought of Glenn Gould while writing this post, who plays many Baroque pieces on the piano. If you lived during the Baroque era, you would typically play any of Bach's pieces on the harpsichord. The thing about the harpsichord, is that you cannot change the volume, because every note is at one dynamic level. One plays expressively with the tempo by speeding up and slowing down to play expressively and in the style that Bach might have played. One may chose to slow down at a cadence to play "expressively." The reason I bring up Glenn Gould is because first of all, he plays Bach's music on the piano, not on the harpsichord. He plays with the volume by playing certain sections louder than others. He also plays the pieces almost like you would from the Romantic era by having these long lush lines on the piano. He plays the trills a certain way, that someone from the Baroque period might not have played. He is one of my favorite pianists to listen to, and there are some that don't like his playing because he does not fit the Baroque style of playing. Is this really that big of a deal to play music a certain way?

I think the main point here that I'm trying to make is to say that there is no wrong or right way to play music. I believe one should play music to the style that is enjoyable to them, and there will always be someone out there that may not like the style that you play, and that's okay. I also believe that a musician who can play in the style that others might enjoy or want as well as playing their own style is a true musician. I believe this because it shows that you truly understand others opinions, and you have also formed your own.

One of the most important composers of our time.

This is an article from today's New York Times on the composer Arvo Part. In the midst of the world's hustle and bustle, the simplicity of his music can be arresting. As a singer, I am most familiar with his choral works, as I have had the chance to perform several of them over the years. However, I know he is an equally gifted instrumental composer.
In the context of our class conversations, he seems like a composer who who is completely unconcerned with whether his music is considered 'highbrow' or 'lowbrow'. He simply writes for the universal human spirit, which has no class or economic divisions. I did find it interesting though that he is now writing mostly for commissions, which ends up being only for those people or groups that can afford it....

A Recipe for Success from the "Cook Book"

Today in class, we discussed Mahler's "Resurrection" Symphony. I was struck by the uniformly powerful effect that this piece seems to have had on most of the members of our class, and I enjoyed the quote we read aloud (I'm paraphrasing here): "I'm not a religious person, but when I listen to Mahler, I become religious. He somehow manages to capture a sense of the infinite." A quick google search after class revealed page after page of listeners who have had similar experiences with Mahler's 2nd; sheer numbers will prove that this piece has the power to effect change! So what endows a musical work with this kind of evocative, uplifting, altering power? Does the power lie in the music itself (in its craft and composition)? Does it rest in some musical allusion to a universal human journey, some expression of absolute truth? Does it demand something from its audiences (and if so, what)?

Here's what it seems to boil down to for Cook:

*The composer's job: To create an environment where listeners can experience music as a natural phenomenon while recognizing it as a human construction and then to use this "hidden persuader" to cross barriers created by faulty assumptions.

*The audience's job: To listen with open ears and minds, ready to gain insight into other cultures/subcultures (in a word, to be willing to consider and possibly accept new forms/levels of truth).

*The net result: The ability to bridge cultural gaps, to encourage individuals and societies to reconstruct their own identities, and to effect lasting, positive change.

Here's the full quote:

"If both music and musicology are ways of creating meaning rather than just of representing it, then we can see music as a means of gaining precisely the kind of insight into the cultural 'other' that a pessimistic musicology proclaims to be impossible. If music can communicate across barriers of difference, it can do so other barriers as well. One example is music therapy, where music communicates across the cultural barrier of mental illness. But the most obvious example is the way we listen to the music of other cultures (or, perhaps even more significantly, the music of subcultures within our own broader culture). We do this not just for the good sounds, but in order to gain some insight into those cultures. And if we use music as a means of insight into other cultures, then equally we can see it as a means of negotiating cultural identity. Music becomes a way not only of gaining some understanding of the cultural 'other' but also of shifting your own position, constructing and reconstructing your own identity in the process. Music, in short, represents a way out of cultural pessimism. If we don't experience music as though it were a phenomenon of the natural world then we cut ourselves off from a means of overcoming difference. But at the same time we need to know that music is not a phenomenon of the natural word but a human construction. It is the ultimate hidden persuader."

Do we agree?

Conflicts in Detroit

From todays New York Times: Violinist Sarah Chang gets drawn into union battles in Detroit.

A Challenge

By the end of my second post in this class, I came to the conclusion that we need to change the context of our music concerts; to somehow re-package them. I have full-faith in the musical product, but I believe we may have taken the personal aspect out of the experience.
After we talked about it in class, it boiled down to; well, how do you change it? So, that got me thinking. In this new musical utopia, what would my new concert experience be like? Would it be longer, or shorter? Would I talk more than I sang? Would I play things twice if someone wanted to hear it again? Would I let people clap whenever they wanted?
Well, I think it is time to put my money where my mouth is. I have a piece of music that was written for me and another singer, that is prepared and ready to premier, but have no date set. Could we, my fellow music-makers, devise a concert experience that breaks out of the social norms of the usual graduation recital that we see quite often? If we (granted I do have my own ideas) come up with a plan, I am more than willing to put it into action, and then see what the public thinks. We're only going to change the future of classical music if we go out and actually try new things.

Thoughts on Entertainment and More Wagner

I was thinking about our discussion last week about art and entertainment, and a particularly relevant essay came to mind. It is called "Trickster in a Suit of Lights," and appears in Maps and Legends by Michael Chabon. Chabon is one of my wife Shannon's favorite writers (Shannon is a Ph.D. candidate in English). His writing is also very witty and fun. I will try and make copies for everyone tomorrow, but here are the first few sentences:

"Entertainment has a bad name. Serious people learn to mistrust and even to revile it. The word wears spandex, pasties, a leisure suit studded with blinking lights. It gives off a whiff of Coppertone and dripping Creamsicle, the fake-butter miasma of a movie-house lobby, of karaoke and Jägermeister, Jerry Bruckheimer movies, a Street Fighter machine grunting solipsistically in a corner of an ice-rink arcade. Entertainment trades in cliché and product placement..."

Chabon goes on to suggest:
"...Maybe the reason for the junkiness of so much of what pretends to entertain us is that we have accepted - indeed, we have helped to articulate - such a narrow, debased concept of entertainment."

Just like "art," "high culture," and "lowbrow," "entertainment" has inherited a lot of baggage regarding its meaning. Perhaps we can discuss this as a class tomorrow.

On another note, I wanted to mention that there is an awesome article on the MET's Ring cycle and how they are trying to change the image of opera in the latest edition of Newsweek. I will also try to xerox this for tomorrow.

Last chance to catch Mahler 2 tomorrow!

Hey all,

Just in case you didn't know, the BSO is performing Mahler 2 one last time tomorrow night at 8 PM. College Card tickets are available for the performance, and you can start picking them up at 10 AM at the BSO Box Office. I am going to go to the Box Office around 9:30 AM tomorrow to make sure I get a good place in line.

If you aren't doing anything tomorrow night and you haven't seen it already, you should definitely catch it! The BSO is one of the greatest symphonies in the world (no joke) and it is kind of amazing that we live mere miles away from their home!

Cheers,
Dave

Mahler 2

I must say, I too agree that the Mahler Symphony was absolutely incredible. It was actually the first Mahler I have ever seen live and I must say that I will never forget what a powerful piece it truly is. I was amazed by the playing of the BSO. There sound was unified and at times frightening, it seems that when they pull a big name out of the hat like Mahler they must also pull the big members of the BSO on stage for the performance. I have never seen so many original BSO members on stage at once before. Usually, they are mixed with either subs or subbing section players, but this was the BSO stacked. The soloists were incredible, the choir was off at times but their size and volume made up or any lack of musicality, and the organ entrance was both thrilling and disappointing. I know that me saying I wanted to be blown away with volume and force could be expected from others as well, James Levine's true genius was seen in that 4th movement. The organ only added to the sound, never once overtaking the orchestra, which then allowed the orchestra to grow to a full ff making a far more exciting overall experience. All and all, it was an incredible concert and I urge all of you to attend the next Mahler concert considering it is the REAL Boston Symphony Orchestra.

Mahler Symphony no. 2 with the BSO

This past Thursday, I went to see the BSO play a live performance of Mahler's Symphony no. 2, and it was an absolutely amazing performance. If you have a chance to see it this weekend, all of you should make an effort to see this monumental work.

When I'm usually listening to Mahler symphonies at home, I usually take breaks between movements because his symphonies are extremely long. There wasn't an intermission when I went to see the BSO, and I'm not used to listening for a prolonged period of time without a break. Usually when you go to a recital or any classical music concert, a performance half usually does not go for more than 30-45 minutes. I don't want to say that I have a low attention span, but for a large piece like this, there needs to be breaks. Dave from out Futures of Classical Music class may speak from experience as a french horn player, but I believe a taxing brass piece of music should have breaks. I know they are professionals, but I think the audience and the players themselves would like to have breaks. What do you (members of the class and blog readers) think about having breaks between movements of a large piece?

Clapping in between movements is considered impolite, improper, and incorrect during any classical music concert. During the BSO concert, there was an applause between movements when the soloists (vocalists) came onto the stage. I think it is kind of funny when someone plays a terrific 1st movement anywhere, and no one claps after a virtuosic piece of music. I also attended the Pacifica Quartet concert this past Tuesday, and I noticed after they played a terrific first virtuosic movement of Shostakovich's String Quartet no. 3, you heard an overall approval with no clapping. I would describe it as a light polite "ahhhhhhhhh" from the audience. Why not just clap for the performers? Is it so ingrained in ourselves not to make exceptions every once in a while? Referring back to Levine, you would obviously not do a thunderous, boisterous, bombastic applause after a nocturne is played, but I think after an awesome 1st movement, you should give a polite applause.

One other thing I found interesting about the Mahler symphony was the chorus. The chorus sings in the last movement only, but they came on stage, and literally sat down the whole time and stood up for the last movement. I guess it may take a while for them to come on stage together as a group, but I thought that would be the most opportune time to take a break while the chorus comes on stage for the last movement. I guess you could say the same thing about the harp or organ player who just have one solo through the whole piece, but this is a large chorus that you could have an exception for.

A Short(ish) Post About Schenker

I think I'm becoming known for notoriously long posts. :-) I'll limit myself to one thought-provoking quote from the "Cook book" and a few follow-up questions this time:

"Music theory emerged from the ferment of ideas that surrounded the reception of Beethoven's music. Heinrich Schenker did a kind of reverse engineering job; this model wasn't intended to represent the chronology of composition. Schenkerian analysis assumed the music of Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms was of value, and tried to demonstrate this by showing how the music really was coherent. It was an apologetic discipline, in the sense of being designed to defend a valued repertory, to underwrite its canonic status. In the decades after the Second World War, intuition and emotionally loaded language were ruthlessly eliminated. Theory and analysis became increasingly technical, increasingly incomprehensible to anyone except specialists. In this way, then, theorists were guilty of refusing to engage critically with the music. Instead of just deferring such engagement, like the musicologists, the theorists proclaimed it unnecessary or even philosophically suspect."

1. Does Schenkarian analysis occupy the same role in today's musical world that it did in Beethoven's? Should it? Has the focus on increasing technicality widened the gap between classical musicians and their audiences?

2. What does Cook mean when he speaks of "engaging critically" with music? Why do we support a theory that carries with it the baggage of so many built-in assumptions? What purposes might other forms of criticism serve, and what elements of critique are frequently absent in a contemporary academic setting? What can we, as musicians, do to foster the sort of "balance" that Cook describes in our own critical engagement with music?

Cross-polinating

I do not have a lot to comment on this week, but after the "New Approaches to Teaching" Class yesterday, I would like to pose a question for us to munch on. As artists in the 21-st century, do we need to band together with other creative artists (authors, dancers, philosophers) to help more clearly define the necessity of our arts to a population who may deem them frivolous? And if so, should we be spending more time learning about each others creative processes?

Follow-up on cultural work

Hi all,

Per Professor Jackson's request, I did some research into the meaning of the word "cultural work." Unfortunately, I still wasn't able to come up with much information. Most music textbooks make no mention of the term, and a Google search does not prove to be any more enlightening.

I did locate one essay called "The Cultural Work of Music Education: Nietzsche and Heidigger," by David Lines. In the essay, Lines never explicitly defines cultural work, though he states, "From the perspective of the cultural work paradigm, the music educator is attuned to the wider dimension of plurality and multiplicity, and is simultaneously a generator or energiser of new values and forms of cultural music-expression." (p. 16).

Though there is no entry for "cultural work" in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, I did find the following definitions useful:

work (n) = sustained physical or mental effort to overcome obstacles and achieve an objective or result.

For culture, there were several intriguing definitions:

culture (n) = the integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that depends upon the capacity for learning and transmitting knowledge to succeeding generations.

culture (n) = acquaintance with and taste in fine arts, humanities, and broad aspects of science as distinguished from vocational and technical skills.

culture (n) = the act of developing the intellectual and moral faculties especially by education.

(I feel like there are some transparent assumptions contained within these definitions!)

Based on the context of the term, snippets of information I have gleaned from the Lines essay, the Merriam Webster definitions and on Levine's use of the word in Highbrow/Lowbrow, I propose the following definition for cultural work:

cultural work (n) = any act or effort which attempts to either reinforce and uphold existing cultural values, or seeks to create new cultural genres to be either lauded or derided.

Please feel free to add on, modify, or subtract from this definition - I'm sure it's far from perfect!

Stealing Music?

I was reading John's post on concert ticket prices, and I thought to myself about mp3 technology, and the great amount of people that steal music off the internet. Artists that are alive today definitely deserve money for what they create. There are certain artists, like Michael Jackson when he was alive, who buy the rights to artist's songs and earn a profit off the artists who may not even be alive, like the Beatles (I'm speaking just of John Lennon and George Harrison of course). In a Nike's sneaker commercial, Michael Jackson used "Revolution 9" (article in this link), and this action really upset ex-Beatles member Paul McCartney.

What exactly are you stealing when you download an mp3 you haven't purchased? Are you stealing a sound or are you truly stealing an artist's creation? I understand many artists are making a living off selling music, but there are record companies out there that own the rights to certain songs, and they just want to make a profit off a sound clip. Or how about Tupac who passed away in the mid 1990s, and the fact that he is making a profit for Death Row Records?

The other thought that came up was about hip hop artists that sample. One of the biggest controversies was when Vanilla Ice was accused of stealing the bass line from "Under Pressure" from the rock band Queen. He changed a few notes in the bass line, and it wasn't stealing. Is this really being an artist when you sample other artist's works? Does this make it music and are you an artist when you do this? I don't know how I feel about this, so I'm leaving this open to suggestions in the blog.

Miri Ben-Ari & Cameron Carpenter

I highly suggest that all of you hop on the Internet and check out both of these artists. Mari is an incredible violinist who primarily works within the fields of Hip-Hop and R&B. Cameron is an outstanding organist which provides a different setting for his recitals. I don't want to ruin the surprise but these are two individuals who are indeed trying to fill the gap of old and new. Whether you like them or not, you can at least admire there passion and determination to change. Enjoy!

Complaints...

Just to level the ground when it comes to the stereotype that all classical concerts are expensive, or at least far more expensive than the average concert today...I thought some of you might find this interesting.

Boston Symphony Orchestra
Tuesday and Thursday Evenings: $29.00-108.00
Friday Afternoons: $29.00-103.00
Friday & Saturday Evenings: $31.00-118.00
Open Rehearsals: $20.00

Handel & Haydn Society: $18.00-87.00 (depending on performance)

New York Philharmonic: $44.00-127.00

The Silk Road Ensemble with Y0-Y0 Ma: $45-00-175.00

Dave Matthews Band: $82.00-238.00

Roger Waters (Pink Floyd): $51.00-1,648.00 :-)

Half Full or Half Empty?

I'm aware that the world does contain pessimists--those "when I was a kid" types who reminisce about the happy past and moan about an impending Armageddon. But why does classical music seem to attract doom-and-gloomers to an extent that few other art forms do? Sometimes I feel like the trump of doom is sounding at full force both from within and from without. Pop culture calls classical music a dying genre for a dying generation, and even music critics--so-called "supporters" of the art--forecast decline. (Example: "A new dark age [may be] descending upon humanity that could wipe out even the memory of classical music. Will this future come to pass? It’s impossible to say, however, the current direction the orchestral side of classical music is heading seems to be one of near extinction. . ." The Partial Observer) Such an outlook certainly isn't new, but membership in these self-destructive ranks is now widening to include classical musicians and composers themselves.

I'll never forget an assembly at Arizona State University where a Pulitzer Prize-winning composer delivered a speech to the student body that began like this: "We all know that classical music is dying--that cheap entertainment is desensitizing audiences and killing art. Nobody wants new classical music. Nobody needs new classical musicians. This is the world in which your generation must learn to live." Is it really? I do feel like most classical musicians (even the brightest, most ambitiously optimistic!) see their art form as an "endangered species." Why? And based on what--antiquated, 19th-century assumptions? It was so refreshing to read Cook's statement in Chapter 3 of his short introduction to music: "There is no reason for saying that classical music as a whole is in a state of crisis. Classical music is not dead, probably not even dying. But what has kept it alive is a dramatic transformation of its role--a transformation [that] has been barely acknowledged in academic writing. In other words, if there is a crisis in classical music, is not in the music, but in our ways of thinking about it."

The time is ripe for discussion, and the better able we are to deconstruct our 19th-century assumptions, the better able we will be to see the future of classical music in an optimistic light. I did some sleuthing around on the internet, and although I ran into a lot of doom-and-gloomers, I also found a heartening number of classical music optimists out there! (You can click on the links below to read the full articles or just glance over the excerpts I've posted.) Fellow idealists: Enjoy!

Hope for the Future of Classical Records

"As a major record label, I believe we have an obligation to make recordings that are relevant. And to me relevance means that people actually listen to our recordings. If the public does not respond, that is an indication that we have done something wrong. When we release that rare standard repertoire recording that is truly brilliant and extraordinarily different from what is already available, we find that the public does respond. Evgeny Kissin's first recordings ever of the Beethoven Piano Concertos, which we just recently released, is already making an enormous impression. So, even though we haven't completely given up on standard repertoire recordings, we've been obliged to broaden our artistic horizons dramatically. And I think that ultimately this is the good news that has come out of the crisis facing the classical record industry. Because rather than drift towards commercial oblivion with new recordings of old music that don't sell, we have started doing something about it. The effort is paying off with a surge of compositional creativity that I believe will benefit the entire classical musical world and audiences, in particular, for many years to come."

Education is the Future of Classical Music

"During the past decade, reports about the impending death of classical music have arrived with such regularity that doom-saying is practically a full-time activity for several arts journalists. Today's pop culture, they say, combined with the serious decline of music education in many school districts — has built a society in which classical music is terra incognita to most people. While debates go on about the future of classical music, there are encouraging signs of life in this art form all over the globe. Some of the optimism is generated by classical-music downloads, which have taken off like a rocket as symphony orchestras launch their own private music labels and offer both downloads and live streaming on the Internet. Never has so much classical music been so widely accessible: a trip to YouTube will let you see and hear great performers of the past and present singing arias, playing piano preludes and conducting orchestras."

"Here at home, Seattle Opera did a demonstration of the opera segment they're taking to the kids: a scaled-down, colloquial-English version of the first act of Wagner's mighty "Ring." The presentation had everyone riveted, as the three young "Rhinemaidens" teased and taunted the ugly dwarf who was later to take a revenge that corrupted and ultimately ended the world. The parallels to contemporary playground bullying were scarily clear. Аs long as music education — that is, education about all music, playing all instruments — can be brought back to thrive in our schools, kids will have the right to choose what they love to hear and play, and the means to do both with intelligence and good training."

Gangs of New York

I was watching Martin Scorsese's Gangs of New York yesterday on Netflix and, while the movie doesn't have anything specifically to do with the arts, it nonetheless provides a glimpse into the class conflicts and divisions in mid-19th century New York City.

For those who haven't seen the movie, it opens in 1846 and shows a battle over the Five Points area of NYC between Irish immigrants and the "nativists" - Americans who were born on U.S. soil and believe that immigrants should have no right to live in America. I won't give away the plot, but it is basically a tale of revenge and justice between the son of one of the Irish immigrants (Leonardo di Caprio) and "Bill the Butcher" (Daniel Day-Lewis) the nativist leader.

Some interesting things I got out of the first part of the movie:
1. Scorsese's portrayal of NYC is shocking, even for someone familiar with history. The complete squalor that the immigrants live in is stunning. This squalor is also sharply contrasted with the decadent lives of the rich in another part of town.
2. The Irish, most of whom are very recent immigrants, have a starkly different culture from other Americans. They have strange rituals and dances, and some in particular "come from a deep part of the old country, and no one knows what they're saying, but they love to fight the police."
3. Bill and his nativists, rather than simply wiping out the immigrants, do their best to assimilate them. When the movie jumps forward to 1862, Di Caprio's character finds that many of his father's most loyal followers have become acolytes of Bill. They now wear the clothes of the nativists, suppress and exploit more recent Irish immigrants, and do their best to eliminate their own Irish accents and origins. This seems in line with mid to late 19th century thinking about "educating" audiences and essentially, "making them like us."

So, I'm not saying that Gangs is a great film or entirely historically accurate (though it did win some awards for production design and period accuracy), but it is worth seeing at least the first 45 minutes if you haven't seen it before.

Possibilities for the Future

In the time that I have been attending this class I have redirected my thoughts towards the future of classical music more so than I first believed I would. Upon finishing the book Highbrow Lowbrow I felt a personal responsibility to react to what I had learn of the world past and create a brighter future for the world of classical music. I ruminated on the possibilities of contribution I could make toward this goal and found the answer is very hard to come by. After further reading with Music: A Very Short Introduction I realize that one of points Nicholas Cook resonate with me strongly.

The point Nicholas Cook makes that caught my eye more than the rest is the hierarchy of roles that come into play when attending a classical concert. The idea that Music itself as an entity is the top of the pyramid followed by the composer, that is only the genius composer, who merely writes Music's will on paper. Next is the conductor who reenacts the composers intentions leading its sheep (the performers) down the correct path. At the bottom of this pyramid lie the audience whom if deemed worthy may receive this blessing from the quasi-god known as "Music" (Capital M intentional).

While I do believe music is a very influential part of culture and life, I am skeptical to very it in such godly terms in which the tradition might lead us to. That is, for the planets themselves to revolve around a system that is clearly man made and not universal to the world, but one kind of culture alone seems a bit far fetched. Allowing myself to understand that this concept is quite possibly out of date also allows me to feel it possible for our generation to come up with a more innovate one that might resonate with the public and perhaps even ourselves greater than the one in place now.

I have never thought about music outside of performance as deeply as I have since entering this class and I believe that says something about our culture today. I suspect that many of my fellow students, rather they be longing to perform, compose, or conduct have thought much outside of how they can make their dream come true in such a shirking world. In other words how to make their dream come true with so few jobs available to them.

I personally have not thought much outside of this because I have in a sense been told that this is just the way it is and all I can do is try my hardest and say my prayers that something works out. This to me is a very bleak and depressing world to approach. Until now in attending this class have I realized that this world does not necessarily have to be the world I accept if I choose to do something about it. While I have my ideas as to what may have expand our world others may have different ones, but I would like to hope that everyone has something in mind other than just accepting the fates and hoping for the best.

A Testimonial

Hello friends, I have more of a testimonial today, and less a continuation of a line of our conversation. It has been a rough couple of days in my family world, and it is in these really hard times that I remember how much music means to me. In the last few days, I have had bits and pieces of so many comforting compositions float through my head, and provide a comfort I really need. Some of this music I have not listened to for years, yet, there it is, fresh as the day I first heard it.
Removing myself from my current situation, I find this fact really encouraging for the long-term engagement of new music-lovers. If we can get just one person to have a powerful connection to a piece of music, it will really stick with them for life. The music we love is both powerful and eternal, and that is a real light in darkness.

My website

I will follow the previous trend and post the link to my website as well:

www.davidbalandrin.com

Cheers,
Dave

Cultural work entry on Wikipedia?

Hi all,

I have to admit, I'm still struggling a bit with the definition of "cultural work." Perhaps we can discuss it again tomorrow?

Nevertheless, I noticed that there is not an entry for "cultural work" in Wikipedia, though the term is mentioned in several biographies as sections (for example, John Doe: Early Life, Education, Cultural Work). Perhaps we can, as a class, contribute a new "cultural work" entry to Wikipedia?

Please let me know what you think.
Dave

While reading this weekend...

Hello Everyone,


While I was reading "Music: A Very Short Introduction" by Nicholas Cook, and it really made me think about pop music's and classical music's lasting qualities. Thinking about most popular music, a song will be listened to and spoken about for certain amount of time, but all of a sudden, no one will ever speak about it after a few months or a year at best. If you think about Bach, Beethoven, Vivaldi, Mozart, and any of these "classical" geniuses, you realize we are still talking about their music almost 300 years later. Even if you think about certain jazz musicians such as John Coltrane, people might say that he is a "legend" or a "genius," and he died over 40 years ago.

I don't want to say in this post that classical music or jazz music is "real" music and all others have no lasting qualities, but I just want ones reading this post to think about how we treat music. Do we listen to something like we are reading a book, and never read it again? Do we treat it like a movie, where we watch it once, might watch it again because it was so deep that we missed a few things so we rewind and replay the scenes? Do we treat music like text books, to sort of "show" that we are educated - like certain pieces we have heard or studied show a right of passage in a way? Sometimes if I'm learning a piece of music or studying/transcribing a solo - another fellow colleague or one of my teachers will be impressed by this "work" that I did, almost showing an accomplishment instead of just an enjoyment of diving deeper into the music by just understanding. Also the way we may play a concert, we may never look at the piece/sonata/symphony again after a one time performance - either because we are sick of the piece, or because the audience that listens to us doesn't demand of it.

The common listener who might not know much about music does not have to necessarily hear a piece and think about all these things, but I just want everyone to realize and be aware of the evolution of music, of how we think about it and how we treat music and their musicians. Look at our public schools for instance, it is not important I guess to have music or art in a child's life because the schools don't want to spend the money because they can't afford it, and it is the first program to cut because it is considered the least important and just an extracurricular activity. There are many talented musicians out there, but they don't receive the great recognition they deserve, many musicians out there are poor, and part of the reason for this is because our society places it as a low point to other things in the world. Music has been an important part of my life, and I want others to experience this joy that I have received through music.

Is it a big deal that we think of music differently today and we treat music as a "one-hit wonder" or talk about an artist's music hundreds of years after they die because we realize how important these composers are to music history? I also want to pose the question of how we will think of the popular artists today 50 or 100 years later, and will certain history books speak about how Eminem, Lady Gaga, or Jessica Simpson were powerful figures in the early 2000s and late 1990s. I was listening to Jamin' 9.45 one early afternoon, and heard "Back in the day Buffet," and they played a Ludicris song from 2000, and said that this was "old school." I feel definitely feel old, and when I think of old school I think of Mozart symphonies or even John Coltrane's Giant Steps not Ludicris' "What's your Fantasy."

These are just some things I thought about when reading about popular music and classical music in this week's reading. I hope some of you guys can build upon this thought or agree/disagree with what I am saying.

Matthew's Link from the Previous Post

Matt

Alex Ross Op-Ed

Hello All!
Saw this in the paper this morning, and I thought that I would post it as food for our on-going conversation. Enjoy!

~Kyle

Alex Ross on the MET's new Ring Cycle.

From a Composer's Viewpoint

I recently spoke with a fellow composer about his compositional process. Evaluating our dialogue from within the framework of Nicholas Cook's ideas about 19th-century constructs opened my eyes to just how readily we (the supposedly "educated") accept the validity of those constructs. "When I wrote in the 80's," he said, "I avoided 3rds and 5ths like the plague. Of course, we all know about that era; composers couldn't use even remotely triadic materials." Couldn't? Or wouldn't? And why? Why are we so influenced by what the academic masses tell us we can or cannot do? (And yes, there are elitist "masses"--masses cultivated by critics who exploit herd mentality just as shamelessly as the purveyors of popular culture do!)

The composer continued: "This is one of my favorite compositions. It's essentially abstract in nature." He handed me the score. "I had been writing a lot of rhythm-and-blues numbers at the time, and I wanted to return to my greatest love: contemporary classical music." Two things immediately struck me as interesting in these statements: 1) This composer saw his rhythm-and-blues and his classical contemporary composing as two entirely separate entities, each with an affixed hierarchal value (he had to "return" to the exalted form after dabbling in the lower), and both immoveable within separate spheres, unable to overlap. 2) This piece that he labeled "essentially abstract in nature" was accompanied by a page-long program note.

"This contains no programmatic elements," he wrote in the program note. And yet a piece lacking programmatic elements was somehow enhanced by a program note?

I love what Nicholas Cook says about this in his typically clear and astute way: "Within the concert hall, 'pure' [instrumental] music reigns supreme. But the victory of music against the word [in the 19th century] was a flawed one. For as word was eliminated from music it began to fill the space around music. The paradox lies in the fact that if music needs to be explained through words, then it must stand in need of explanation, it must be in some sense incomplete without it."

When I was applying for grad schools, I very nearly removed the following statement from the biography on my website (for the very reason that the academic world seems to look down on programmatic music): "Words, to me, are music. I can't read a well-crafted poem or listen to a theatrical performance without musical voices threading their way through the spoken narrative. When setting a text, my own voice joins with the writer's in a unique way to form a new, or rather, renewed creation. Almost every piece I compose is inspired somehow by a poem, a theatrical idea or even just a word or phrase. Tonal music originally developed from vocal models, and my style tends to be governed by the lyricism and melodic phrasing associated with vocal writing, no matter my medium." Now I'm proud of myself for leaving it be.

My website

Here is a link to my website.

Jaunter Sears Website

Personal Website

Dr. Jackson asked that I post the link to my personal homepage:

Erica's Website

I haven't listed or uploaded samples of any of my most recent compositions, and my biography is outdated as well. Maybe posting a public link will motivate me to update! :-)

Placido Domingo and the L.A. Opera - creating music of the future?

Hi all,

I found these articles in the LA Times.

L.A. Opera to deliver 'Il Postino' premiere on Thursday

Placido Domingo Says L.A. Opera's 'The Postman' Is Special Delivery for Latinos

Placido Domingo renew contract with L.A. Opera through 2013

The most fascinating thing is the opera premiere, though. It is a new work with a Spanish libretto that draws on popular culture (it is based on the 1994 film "The Postman"), and it is no accident that Domingo (like Gustavo Dudamel with the LA Phil) is trying to appeal to the heavily Latino population of L.A. I would also guess that this target community is not prone to listening to lots of classical music.

Daniel Catán, the composer of "Il Postino," has a fascinating history:
"An almost preternaturally amiable chap, Catán is the product of a mixed Anglo-Latin cultural upbringing. Descended from Russian-Turkish-Jewish immigrants, he was born and raised in Mexico City and later studied philosophy at the University of Sussex in England and music at Princeton University with Milton Babbitt. Among his influences he cites Stravinsky, Ravel and Alban Berg. He and his wife, a professional harpist, have two grown children and make their home in South Pasadena."

This sounds like the future of classical music to me: music that is rooted in the tradition of Western art music, but is nevertheless forging out in new directions and trying to reach new audiences in exciting ways!

Explorers and Couch Potatoes

Minnesota State University currently offers a course entitled, "Explorers and Couch Potatoes: Active and Passive Media." The class seems to be geared towards media writing majors, and it provides an in-depth analysis of the two major types of audiences in the world of contemporary media: the active audience and the passive (the explorers and the couch potatoes). The course description makes it clear that modern media writers must approach these two audiences in very different ways, and it defines the gulf that separates the two audiences in very clear terms (see the chart below).

For me, one of the most provocative points that Levine makes in Chapter 3 of Highbrow/Lowbrow deals with classical music's shift from cultivating an active audience to demanding a passive one. Levine writes: "To make art possible, performers and audiences had to submit to creators and become mere instruments of the will, mere auditors of the productions of the artist." He goes on to explain that, by the turn of the century, classical music no longer belonged to the performers and their audiences; instead, it belonged to an immortalized classical canon. Symphonies and operas had become gallery artworks, meant to be accepted according to a set of criteria established by music critics. Audiences no longer attended concerts of classical music with the idea that they themselves would be expected to pass judgement. They no longer threw tomatoes when disgruntled or shouted raucously for encores. Instead, they came with the proper attire (no three-foot hats allowed!) and the proper mindset, sitting passively and accepting whatever type of "art" was offered. Classical music had become a mode of one-way, rather than two-way, communication.

The gulf between explorers and couch potatoes was widened even further by the advent of film. In a movie theater, audiences were removed from the performers by much more than just a curtain and a spotlight. In fact, nothing at all was required of such an audience; nothing spectators could say or do would alter the performance to any degree.

Read the description of active and passive audiences below, and tell me what you think about 21st-century music and the type of audience it demands. Does contemporary classical music cater to an active or a passive audience? What about aleatoric music? Popular forms? Should we be trying (as modern composers and performers) to reach out to an active audience, a passive one, or both? Is there a way to approach passive audiences on their own terms and re-teach them to be active listeners? (If the text below gets cut off for some reason, you can visit the original site here: http://www.mnstate.edu/hanson/MC210/MC210_active&passive_media.htm)

Active (Newspapers, Magazines & the Internet)	Passive (Television & Radio)
About half of all American adults read a newspaper daily (readership is weighted toward greater age, education and affluence; somewhat stronger in suburban and rural settings)	About two-thirds of all American adults watch TV news (consistent across all ages, education levels, incomes and other demographic data)
Active audience seeks out information of interest ("pull" strategy)	Passive audience receives information with little focused effort
Newspapers reach mass audience limited by geography. Magazines may appeal to general or specialized interests. Internet sites may serve either.	Generally broadcast to mass audiences, limited by extent of signal. Cable TV has introduced more specialized targeting. Radio formats also permit some degree of "narrowcasting."
Readers are usually fully engaged in the act of reading	Viewers/listeners are often distracted ... their attention must be captured first
Readers must be literate in English	Literacy isn't a factor — commonly used by children, non-native English speakers and others who get little from the printed word
Substantial cost factor (subscriptions, newsstand purchase, computer & Internet access) — though library users can access at no personal cost	Little cost for access to local stations beyond buying the TV or radio — though cost is a factor in access to cable or satellite services
Audience has greater interest in public affairs — usually well-versed in our culture	Broader audience whose interest in public affairs can't be assumed. Often serves as introduction to our culture
Nonlinear or "random access" format — reader can easily pick and choose material of personal interest	Linear (sequential) presentation of information — audience can’t skip around or go back
Time element is wide open, depending on reader's needs	Broadcast and viewed in "real time" (though TV programs can be taped for later viewing or references)
Text media are well-suited to provide in-depth material including details and background information	Broadcasts provide generally weak format for providing details and background; usually focus on summaries and overviews
Relies mostly on words to portray emotion, action, drama, humor.	Strong format for presenting emotional, dramatic and humorous content (visuals and sounds)
Audience is primarily seeking information	Audience is seeking a combination of entertainment, relaxation and information

How to make it happen (?)

In this week's New Yorker, there is an article about James Dyson, the inventor of the vacuum that bears his name, written by John Seabrook. In one section he talks about the initial US launch of the vacuum. When it came to the US in 2002, most retailers were selling cheap vacuums that sold for about $100, and here was the Dyson priced at $399. It seemed absurd. Who would spend that much on a vacuum?!?!? Yet, within the first months of it being on the market it sold 10 times the initial projections, and went from being carried in one chain store, to six. What was it that made it so successful? Dyson knew that by sticking to his guts and trusting the design and capability of the vacuum, people would come to realize just how much better his product was. Seabrook states that;

"Dyson had grasped what the companies trying to make hundred-dollar vacuum cleaners had forgotten: that a lot of people... are willing to pay a premium for a machine that will deliver an emotional experience."

Doesn't that just say it all. We, as musicians, don't need to change our product, we need to re-brand ourselves! We have a product that has been tested over hundreds of years and packs a strong "emotional experience", but we've put it in an old ratty box. We need to run away from the old ideology that makes classical music about being "intelligent" or not; "educated" or not; "cultured" or not. We need to remind people that art music is about life, about love, about loss, about grief and joy. We need to help people connect with the music we love, and have honest emotional experiences.

article on james levine - boston.com

http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/exhibitionist/2010/09/james_levine_sp_1.html

An interesting article about the upcoming season of the BSO as well as James Levine recovery from surgery - this upcoming year will be his 7th year as the music director of the BSO - it leaves a lot of unanswered questions of his health as well as his future of directing the BSO in the air...

Some sad local news - Charles Ansbacher

Charles Ansbacher, director of the Boston Landmarks Orchestra, dies at 67

In response to the "Blame Game"

It is known throughout the world that history, will and forever more be condemned to itself. We "artists" always feel neglected by the general population...however maybe it is them who feel neglected by us. I find it irresponsible in todays culture to commit oneself to music, and only study one genre and/or style. We live today...in a culture where almost every piece written can be heard, a culture that can literally store an entire library of recordings on a device that can now fit in our pocket. Classical music is no longer at the forefront of our day simply because it is not required as it once was...but maybe that is our fault. Maybe we could try and understand the words of Tony Blair in saying, "people...need to take more responsibility". If things need to change, we need to change them. I agree with everything that was written...however I find myself pointing the finger at me, rather than others...

Re: two worlds collide

Hey everyone, this is my first post, I'm new to this "blogging" concept, and it is interesting. I enjoyed reading your post Jaunter, and I have to say I'm a saxophone player at a conservatory, and that just doesn't sound right either. Usually someone who plays saxophone is a street musician or plays in clubs without an educated background. If you think of some of the best saxophone players, none of them really had an education, but were either self taught or had the natural talent without having the education. Today there is already a prejudice I believe between where people go to school, instead of how good of a player they are. If a musician does not go to a conservatory like Julliard, people assume they do not know much about music - Once you say a particular school, people immediately start to judge your talent as a musician. Our craft requires extreme precision with no error. If you do a test and get a 60% that is considered passing, when you are musician, if you hit only 60% of the notes, you are considered extremely bad. The point to all of this is that people usually judge musicians by their background, and I agree with you Jaunter, that there is a great deal of prejudice among the music world as well as the whole world -

Matt

Two worlds collid.

I believe that it isn't intimidation, but the sense of not belonging to the scene itself that the general public is feeling. Because people feel like they do not belong to the social group and are even shunned from it, they retaliate with negative reactions towards it.

I often find myself torn between two worlds. The world I was raised in and the world I want to be a part of. The world I was raised in is one of the general public and more specifically the low to middle class African-American diaspora. In this environment I often feel embarrassed to admit that I am a classical musician and usually won't admit it at all. Too often people including my own family would tease me for appreciating and being apart of something so out of their own culture. This is also the reason that I am afraid to admit my true background in a conservatory setting. I fear that a will not be accepted into this world if I admit just how far placed my own cultural background is from the conservatory.

It is the fear of prejudice that has been cast from both the general public and classical music appreciators alike that there is such a divide in the two worlds. If this prejudice were to disappear and people truly became accepting of others, then they would be able to accept one another into new worlds unexplored. New worlds in which if they open themselves to it could be a sea of pleasures they once thought was a swamp.

Some thoughts on musical divergence and schism

Hi all!

I am excited to join this fascinating online conversation! I really enjoyed our first class and I am looking forward to our discussions for the rest of the semester.

For my first post, I wanted to run an idea I have had for some time by the community and get your input. Several years ago, I was wondering about the issue that many of us have already brought up: why, in our modern times, does classical music suffer from a "stigma" of elitism and snobbery? In addition, it seems that many regard classical music as being boring, out of touch, and wholly irrelevant to our modern times? Though classical music has never been popular in my lifetime, it nevertheless seems that just a few generations before mine, classical music was certainly more popular and generally accepted than it is today. So, what happened?

My theory (which I admittedly have not seriously researched) is this: starting in the period following World War I, the arts gradually began to move away from focusing on aesthetics and public appeal. Some of the movements representing this shift are Dadaism (visual art), strict twelve-tone composition (music), and avant-garde poetry (literature). As the pendulum shifted away from creating aesthetically pleasing works, it swung towards an increased emphasis on the artist and, in particular, the medium or method used to create the art in question.

For example, Arnold Schoenberg is remembered less for his music than for his system of musical composition. Visual artists like Jackson Pollock are remembered for how they produced their works (i.e., paint splatters, or something like "Canvas, covered with layers of graphite mixed with fecal matter and human hair"). Writers like Kenneth Goldsmith who wrote Fidget (a recent work of poetry in which he wrote down every action he performed for 24 hours) are remembered for some innovation of composition, not for the writing itself. In each case, the work becomes almost irrelevant - what is important is the artist and his/her technical method of production.

By the 1950s and '60s, some aspects of these artistic movements had become nearly anti-public and openly confrontational with the audience. The public, alienated from the arts that used to fulfill their entertainment needs, sought something new to fill the void. In stark relief to art music (which unfortunately was considered the descendant of classical music and had, in my opinion, become quite elitist) true "pop" music was born: short, easily listenable tunes that made no attempt to challenge the audience in any way. Pop was created to be the ultimate definition of aesthetically pleasing art - a welcome relief for a public that had grown tired of being simultaneously both ignored and shocked.

I believe that this massive schism caused the most damage to the field of music, where two entirely separate, radicalized and fragmented super-genres came into being: on one hand the "ivory tower" of academic art music, and on the other, easily digestible and disposable commercial pop.

Of course, these are rather broad and sweeping generalizations. And like all generalizations, I'm sure parts of it are false. But I do think that there is something to this argument. At the very least, it is our responsibility as musicians to do all we can to heal the wounds that have been inflicted on music, and close the rifts that so widely divide classical music from all other genres.

New from Alex Ross!

I saw this and I wanted to share!

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Listen-to-This/Alex-Ross/e/9780374187743/?itm=4&USRI=listen+to+this

I'm totally excited!

The Blame Game

Who's fault is it--this modern phenomenon that has locked contemporary classical music behind the doors of conservatories and widened the gulf between composers and the general public? When did academia become so elitist and exclusive, and when did our modern audiences turn off their ears to new developments in the classical realm? Why are the various camps and counter-camps in modern compositional thought so often hostile one to another? What, exactly, has changed in the process of communication that we call music over the past century?

Like many of you, I am coming into this class with more questions than answers, and the more questions I ask, the more questions I seem to find. But as complicated as the situation becomes and as difficult as it is to pin the blame (is there even blame to pin?), these questions must be asked. They are vital to us, as musicians, and to the future of classical music. If we don't understand where we've gone wrong and where we've gone right in the past, how are we to construct the future?

We, as classical musicians, work tirelessly training ourselves to be good performers or composers. But if our performance/composition doesn't connect with an audience, then our attempt at communication has failed (no matter the level of our technical proficiency), right? I think so. Then what's the solution? Do we write/perform to suit the general tastes of the broadest possible audience (the lowest common denominator)? Do we continue writing/performing in highly academic ways, hoping that some day our audience will "get it?" Do we try mingling the two--reaching out to our audience with new and interesting ideas from within an accessible framework? I certainly lean toward the third possibility, but I think there might be a completely different perspective altogether. What if we stopped focusing so much on training composers/performers and started training listeners? Now, I'm certainly not suggesting that we send every child in America to a music conservatory and teach him/her the finer points of set theory and counterpoint; I'm suggesting that we help our audience understand things musically on an intuitive level. I have an inkling that something of this kind might be accomplished using Eurhythmics, but I need to let my ideas percolate a little longer. :-)

In the meantime, check out this youtube video that I posted about a year ago:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUYKj2oetYE

Food for thought...

There are only a few shows on TV that I watch on a regular basis, but one that I really try to see is Anthony Bourdain's "No Reservations." There is just something in the mix of beautiful locations, his free-wheeling prose, and incredible food which captures my attention. On the most recent episode, he has returned to Paris to mark the occasion of his 100th episode. This is kind of a homecoming for the show, as the very first episode, some six seasons ago, was filmed in the same city. This time though, the focus of the show was to examine a shift in the food-world of Paris; from the high-cuisine of the Michelin star-rated restaurants, to a more casual and simpler way to dine. What he found was that these new 'rogue' chefs DIDN'T throw out the old to create something wholly new, but rather they built upon what had come before them. They stripped off what was anachronous and created a dining experience that was more at ease with itself in the context of our contemporary culture.

As I watched the show, I couldn't help seeing connections to the Prologue in "Highbrow Lowbrow" and to our current musical world in the States. Could we fire up our concerts and recitals by boiling-off some traditions that no long serve us? Should we really roll our eyes when an excited audience member claps between movements of a symphony? Do fancy gowns and tuxedos really guarantee a better performance? Given an attentive audience, could Schubert songs return to ale houses and still retain their sophistication?

I seem to have more questions than answers as I begin this semester, but for today, I just wanted to offer a little food for thought.

Welcome, Colleagues!

Welcome, colleagues from Longy School Future of Classical Music '10!

As soon as you can, please make your way to Alex Ross's blog, www.therestisnoise.com. He keeps his ear close to the ground; he has a feed; and he provides a list of other music blogs as well (see below. You will also enjoy Greg Sandow's blog, http://www.artsjournal.com/sandow/.

Also,

Subject :	Alex Ross, No. 3 (list of music blogs)
Link URL :	http://www.therestisnoise.com/2004/11/music_blogs.htm

Subject :	The Source
Link URL :	http://www.thesource.com/
Category :	General
Description :	"covering hip-hop music, politics, and culture"--Wikipedia

Subject :	Vibe
Link URL :	http://www.vibe.com/
Category :	General
Description :	"features R&B and hip-hop music artists, actors and other entertainers"--Wikipedia

Subject :	ArtsJournal
Link URL :	http://www.artsjournal.com
Category :	General

More to come. Help me grow the list!

Looking forward to reading your posts and to seeing you Tuesday!

"A morning Scherzo , Slowing to Adagio"

From NY times

When I was looking through NY times, there were lots of news, but this was interesting to me. A morning Scherzo, Slowing to Adagio! If a reader doesn’t know the musical term, it would not make the one become interested. I like this title, Francisco j. Nunez, the founder and artistic director of the Young People’s Chorus of New York City, a youth chair, starts his busy morning like scherzo, but as the time is going to dinner or later, his life tempo is getting slower like Adagio. Really quick lunch should be prepared, and those kinds of arranging finally make his dinner nicer. I think we could also apply this to our life, not just for daily life.. Time has been flying, and the end of semester is coming up. How was the beginning of this semester, and this almost finished end of this semester is really comfortable Adagio? How fast it is?

BSO 12/5/09

I attended the Boston Symphony Orchestra concert this past Saturday night. It was a wonderful concert with a program that included Bartok's Divertimento for Strings, Martinu's Violin Concerto No. 2 and Dvorak's Symphony No. 8. Christoph von Dohnányi conducted in Levine's absence.

I enjoyed each piece on the program, but did see something after the concerto that I had never seen before. Frank Peter Zimmerman was the violin soloist. His intense and beautiful performance created quite the ovation from the audience. The applause seemed to be non-stop, but then Zimmerman came out to play an encore. I expected to hear a fast, flashy piece that would excite the audience even more. Every encore I had heard up to this point was like that. However, Zimmerman took a different route and performed a slow movement from one of the Unaccompanied Suites by JS Bach. It created quite an aura in the hall. At the end of the encore, the audience was just as excited as when they heard the fast paced end of the 3rd movement of the Martinu. How interesting and intriguing I found this to be. Has anyone else been to a concert where the encore is a slow, beautiful piece?

violist's heritage through music

In this past Sunday’s Boston Globe Arts Section, I enjoyed reading a fascinating article. The title of the article, “An emotional link to a nation’s past: Armenian composer’s powerful music brings trio of collaborators together,” says a lot in itself on the content of the article. In my new identity as a violist and violinist, I am always on the lookout for articles about either instrument, but finding one about viola is still more rare than those on violin. Also, the topic of music linked to one’s heritage also tends to grab my interest, and this article certainly fulfills this need.

The article discusses the recital this Tuesday, 12/1 at Jordan Hall, with Kim Kashkashian, one of the most famous violists existing today, Tigran Mansurian, who will play piano and sing, and percussionist Robyn Schulkowsky. Mansurian and Kashkashian have collaborated for more than two decades, and the collaboration continues with this recital, as it features pieces composed and arranged by Mansurian. Both of Armenian descent, their program pays homage to their heritage in including songs by famous Armenian composer, Komitas Vartabed. Kashkashian’s first exposure to Komita’s music inspired her so much to eventually create a recording with Mansurian’s music, as well. There is a rawness to the sound of Mansurian’s vocals that, as Kaskashian describes, “really let through the incredible depth of emotion and knowledge of the people, of the land, of the circumstances of the nation – its blood.”

Kashkashian relates the power of Komitas and Mansurian share in their music: “bring the ancient past into a form that modern Armenians – and Westerners – could understand and embrace.” The program they present this Tuesday will feature ancient religious chants arranged by Mansurian for viola and percussion, two groups of Komitas’s songs, four of Mansurian’s songs, and a duet for viola and percussion. The writer of the article also addresses Kashkashian’s “uncommonly expressive tone – shadowy yet lyrical – from the most introverted of string instruments.” I thought this was a fascinating description of viola, but I think it is often how listener’s think of the instrument. It is sandwiched between the upper voice violins and the bass voice cellos. Kashkashian’s description of her own tone and playing is inspiring: “The thing that any musician is trying to do is to take the expressive tool offered them and say something that is, on the one hand, as true to the composer as possible, and on the other, that expresses the deepest, innermost regions of their own hearts.” With this, I truly hope I will be lucky enough to attend this concert.

"Debussy's Homage, With the blanks Filled In"

from New York Times


When I looked through news, there was news about Claude Debussy, one of the fascinating musicians to me, and I was curious of what happened to him. It was about unfinished works.
Sometimes, unfortunately, there is no chance to listen to these kinds of great music to us because before finishing the last one, some composers pass away. I also imagine what is the end? How they could make progress on the music. Some people said the unfinished works should be left alone, but some people want to listen even though extra some touching is needed. The writer, Anthony Tommasini, was at one of those kinds of concerts. He said some details and his feelings from it. For me, the works that are made up by other musicians still made me feel some frustration sometimes because it is not original version, but at the same time, I appreciate I don’t have to miss that. When I remind that most of art such as paintings or architecture have reworked, it could happen.