Kunst ist NICHT Natur. Einige glauben an einen Ursinn (nicht UNsinn, URsinn!), aähnlich einer ewigen Wahrheit. Andere versuchen ohne solch ein Konzept auszukommen. Je pluralistischer oder offener eine Gesellschaft, desto vielfältiger und komplexer die möglichen Positionen, die gleichzeitig möglich sind, die vielleicht konkurrieren oder einfach, ohne sich zu berühren oder zu überschneiden, koexistieren.
In Youtube fand ich eine Videoaufnahme einer Kompositon (Artikulation) von György Ligeti aus dem Jahre 1958, die sehr viele Kommentare provozierte, worunter auch einige lesenswerte sind, die hier zitiert seien, weil sie die Problematik der Interpretation, der Sinnzuschreibung widerspiegeln.
Auswahl aus den Kommentaren zu Ligeti's "Artikulation":
It's strange how every foolish? nonsense can always have a large following among idiots.
laurion69
I have to admit I'm not a huge fan of this kind of music, but I'm doing my best to appreciate this. Does anyone could? help me "understanding/appreciate" this work?
guboub
Don't worryman, just fell it and think what it makes you feel. Don't focus on the 'melody" because is not a melody nor a tune... this kind of music is about your mood. The virtue of this music is that it challenges conventional? "jingles" ... start by listening to other stuff like Penguin cafe , which is lighter, then go to Liget. Best.
Sibarit1973
Sounds like "organised" random noise ...
Anyone could help me to better understand this music. Sometime a few explanation make the music more understable and thus more enjoyable.
I'm no musician and I can barely read a score. However while listening to "classical" music i.e. Mozart,Bach, Brahms, Schubert, Prokofiev, ... I can still out of my ear find some kind of pattern, and at least organisation within the music. In this specific case, I must admit I feel a bit "lost" with? the music.
tontonlklk
It's not that I don't understand the subtle? cleverness, it's just that I have a great deal more respect for music with greater dramatic meaning. The likes of Baroque, Classical and Romantic period composers with their (often) pleasing melodies and nice-sounding harmonies and chord-patterns to me demonstrates more musical ability than the seemingly random application of sounds and notes like this and the likes of Stockhausen. Even I could create random sounds like this and other similar music.
Maddy4Me
The thing is that these are not random sounds. They are purely based on articulation. I believe Ligeti was exploring the? different range of articulation on something as completely unemotionally attached an electronic tape. This piece was composed during a time of scientific revolution so you have to understand where Ligeti is coming from.
kehwa
I think the title is relevant to the piece. I see many comments lacking this understanding. This is pure articulation using electronic tape. There is no pretense of any melodic, harmonic, or rhythmic intention. I feel sorry for those who do not understand this.
kehwa
A composer? doesn't have to be trying to illicit an emotion in the listener. Is music only something that you listen to to cheer yourself up? Not for me. Listening to music can be a form of meditation. I can listen without expecting to receive any certain kind of disruption of my emotional state, because my mind is already balanced and I'm not asking music to be my drug.
30803080308030803081
see thats the point, in my eyes its just not that. if you say its a form of meditation for you than it does illict emotions, becuase it gets you in a meditative? mood even if it doesnt change the mood you started up with. im just saying that music should be there to bring up emotions. like the expressionists did after teh second world war. it wasnt anything beatiful they created but it was the only thing that could express the feelings that came out of all the suffering.
CalmBefore6
thats a good question, what composers like ligeti allways sayed was that music doesnt have to be something that anybody would concider beautiful or at least attracting in a way. and i guess that some dictionary definitions or so say that also. but to me thats just wrong, music has to have the aim to be make somebody have a certain emotional feeling. just like shitting on a rug and calling it art might be right for some artist but for me its just shitting on a rug.
CalmBefore6
@Furiens - I don't find dated equipment as a problem. As an electronic musician, I've found the possibilities of the modern gear more problematic. Back then we had limits we could push, now we have gear pushing us, if we're not strict in what we do. Jean-Michel Jarre has used very primitive lead synths, and it has been a good way to go. Listen to preset sounds of workstations: they sound sweet alone, but can you really use them?
SomFunk
@Furiens There has always been a tendency to classify new music as 'dated'. Almost no run of the mill music lovers can cope with it at all. It has been increasingly difficult for composers from the Romantic period onwards to dissociate as they did from a world every more swallowed up by the all devouring commercialisition of life which has no trouble absoribg modernists which are rendered quasi harmless. Funny creatures trying to get in where they are blocked. Our own alter ego.
felixdevilliers1
I've got a mental block trying to enjoy early electronic compositions -? is it fair to call this 'dated'? Classical music tends to escape this term by its nature, but to me, the limitations of this kind of early synthesiser really don't allow this kind of music to work (even with Ligeti in charge!), now the novelty of primitive electronic sounds and timbres has worn off. Any thoughts?
Furiens 9
A lot of people see or hear things they do not understand and brand it as art. I have seen many who do not genuinely enjoy a piece, but name it artistic and enjoyable simply for the sake of looking profound. To me, and in all honesty, this piece is shit and I have no fking idea why it is lauded or praised.
thebreadskin
Nature doesn't "create" anything, and there is no possible "intent" behind a tree or a fish - it's just there because it's evolved in a certain way.
When we've got a seemingly chaotic and random bunch of noises as a "musical piece", however, I think it? is valid to ask whether it's really a random mess of brush strokes, or we're just missing out on something.
twooffour
@boobtube356 We are free to create things as nature does or as humans do or as we think aliens might if we want. People allow themselves to feel pressured. Trees are great, fish are tasty and beautiful but so is the human brain. The small character count doesn't really allow for a good waffle on this. We can't compete with nature for pure beauty, but nature can't create hidden meanings, interpretations, madness, contrivance, directed tugging of emotion. It's just a different category - It's good
padraigsylvester
Seems people are pressured into finding meaning in art. No one asks what a tree or a fish means. Why ask for meaning here? Why can't? we be free to create things the way nature does? Why can't our creations be appreciated (or not) as such?
boobtube356
_____________________________________________________________
Es zeigt sich ein altes Problem, ein Konflikt zwischen vermuteter oder beanspruchter Wissenschaftlichkeit und Rationalität und Kunst bzw. ihrem herkömmlichen Verständnis als Nichtwissenschaft. Es zeigt sich ein Bedürfnis nach Bewertungskriterien. Es zeigt sich die inakzeptable Situation etwas vielleicht OHNE Interpretation nehmen zu sollen, wie es SEIT (viele sagen: wie es IST).
Nebenbei wird auch das Problem der Zeit, des Alterns, des Neuen erwähnt. Widersprüche tun sich auf. Eigene Bedürfnisse oder Gewohnheiten kollidieren mit einem anerkannten Kanon, mit vermeintlich verbürgten Gruppenhaltungen und -meinungen. Was darf ich selber wissen und fühlen? Soll ich überhaupt noch eine eigene Meinung haben, ein eigenes Fühlen? Gilt nicht nur das Approbierte, Zertifizierte, gesellschaftlich Anerkannte?
In offenen Gesellschaften nimmt niemand einem die Qual der Wahl ab. In geschlossenen oder rigid diktatorischen Regimes darf man nicht nur, sondern MUSS man Vorgaben, Regeln, Konzepten, Ansichten, Weltanschauungen, Ideologien folgen. Das vereinfacht, auch wenn man es (manchmal) Unfreiheit nennt. Freiheit bedeutet immer Wahl. Und die ist of Qual. Man kann nicht das Eine ohne das Andere haben. + und -, Tag & Nacht, Ying + Yang, Seite und Kehrseite, oben + unten, hinten + vorne, drinnen + draussen.
Vgl. dazu: "Zur Erfahrung der Kunst gehört das Bewußtsein des ihr immanenten Antagonismus von Außen und Innen."
Theodor W. Adorno
Siehe auch Adornos Beitrag "Das Altern der Neuen Musik" (hier Link zum pdf)
Siehe auch Seite "Neue Musik" in clyt
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen