|
Post by driscollmusick on Mar 12, 2019 3:12:53 GMT
Claude Debussy – “On Taste”
S.I.M., 15 February, 1913. Reprinted in Monsieur Croche et autres écrits, ed. Francois Lesure (Paris: Gallimard, 1971) pp.222-25 Translated by S. Blum. 
In our time, when the sense of “mystery” is gradually disappearing – – while we’re caught up in attempts to systematically “channel” human beings – -, it was inevitable that we would simultaneously lose the true meaning of the word “taste”. A century ago, to have taste meant nothing more than to support one’s views in a congenial manner. Today, this word has acquired such an extended reference, and functions in so many situations, that it amounts to little more than a kind of argument, a blow from the first in the American style – – a strong affirmation, without elegance. Following a natural tendency, “taste” – – formerly an indication of “nuance” and “subtlety” – – now appears in the context of “bad taste”, where forms and colors engage one another in extraordinary battles…But these reflections are much too general, since we should speak here only of music – – a sufficiently arduous undertaking. Genius may apparently bypass “taste” – – Beethoven, for example. But one might contrast Beethoven with Mozart, who adds the most subtle taste to an equally powerful genius. If we look at the work of J.S. Bach – – the benevolent deity to whom musicians should pray before settling down to work, to protect themselves from mediocrity; these countless works which mirror for us the achievement of the past, from playful arabesques to religious fervor, unsurpassed to this day – – , we would search in vain for a single error of taste. Portia, in “The Merchant Of Venice”, speaks of a music which each man carries within himself…”Woe to him who hears it not” she adds. Remarkable words, which should give cause for thought to those who, before listening to the singing within their souls, concern themselves with picking up the formulas which will best serve them. Or, with great ingenuity, line up single measures against each other, sad like little boxes. Music which smells of tables and slippers. This with the meaning given by mechanics who, trying out a badly assembled machine, say of it, “That smells of oil.” We should guard against WRITING. The work of moles where we end up reducing the living radiance of sounds to an operation in which, painfully, two and two make four. For a long time now, music has experienced what mathematicians call “the delirium of number”. Above all, we should protect ourselves from systems which are nothing but traps to catch dilettantes. There have been, and there still remain – – despite the disorders carried by “civilization” – – enchanting small peoples who learn music as early as one learns to breathe. Their conservatory is: the rhythms of the sea, the wind in the leaves, and the thousand small noises to which they listen attentively, without studying arbitrary treatises. Their traditions exist only in very ancient songs, linked to dances, to which each man, across centuries, brings his respective contribution. Nevertheless, Javanese music follows a counterpoint against which that of Palestrina looks like child’s play. And if one hears the charm of their “percussion”, leaving aside European biases, one must admit that ours is nothing but the barbarous noise of a circus band.  The Vietnamese perform a type of embryonic lyric drama, on Chinese models, in which one recognizes the formula of Wagner Tetralogy, though there are more gods and fewer stage sets…A furious little clarinet takes the emotions in hand; a tam-tam gives a shape to terror…nothing more! No special theater, no hidden orchestra. Nothing but an instinctive need for art, satisfying itself with human inventiveness; not a trace of bad taste! To imagine that these people have never thought of seeking their formula from the school of Munich: what are they thinking about? Would it then be the professional musicians who initiate the decay of civilized countries? Is it possible that the accusation, leveled against the public, of liking only easy music (bad music) is misdirected? Actually, music becomes “difficult” whenever it doesn’t exist, the word “difficult” being nothing but a screen to conceal its poverty. There is only one “music”, and it asserts itself its claim to being, whether to takes the rhythm of a waltz (even in a cafe!) or the imposing framework of a symphony. And why not admit openly that, in the two cases, good taste will often lie on the side of the waltz, while the symphony will barely conceal its pretentious piling up of mediocrity. Let’s not insist further on repeating this commonplace, firm and dense like stupidity: “One must not discuss tastes and colors.” On the contrary, let’s talk to locate OUR TASTE, not that it’s lost, but we’ve smothered it beneath northern quilts. It will be our best source of support in the struggle against the barbarians, who have gotten much worse even since they started to part their hair in the middle. We should uphold the notion that the beauty of a work of art will always remain mysterious: One can never ascertain precisely “how it is made”. We should retain, at any price, this magic peculiar to music. In its essence, it is more disposed to embrace magic than any other art. When the god Pan gathered together the seven reeds of his syrinx, at first he imitated only the long sorrowful tones of the frog, complaining under the moonbeams. Later, he engaged in battles with the songs of birds. Most likely, it is from this time that the birds expanded their repertoire. These are sufficiently sacred beginnings, in which music may well take pride, retaining something of their mystery…In the name of all the gods, we shouldn’t try any longer to rid ourselves of it, any more than to explain it. Embellish it with this subtle attention to “taste” That is the guardian of The Secret.alphawolfcreations.com/debussy-on-taste/
|
|
|
Post by gx on Mar 12, 2019 6:24:05 GMT
Thanks for posting, John. Full of insight and passion, (which is of course, reflected in his music), befitting one who many consider the father of modernism, including myself - (if I had to draw a line - ). Really great to read his words!
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Mar 12, 2019 19:40:28 GMT
I find this fascination with things non-European, esp. with things Oriental, rather quaint, or to put it more bluntly, laughable. Oriental things are romanticized into some sort of grand alternative ideal that really doesn't exist in reality, but only in the minds of those not privy to oriental culture and upbringing, and who therefore naturally associate a sort of romantic, mysterious, and at times fantastical quality to it. The objective fact is that the European classical tradition brought music to a level of sophistication not paralleled anywhere else, and yes I know this flies in the face of those who embrace the modernist philosophy, but I really don't buy the hogwash that this grand edifice is somehow inferior to the simple Javanese man beating on his skin-and-wood drum in the forests of Indonesia just because the Javanese man is "following his heart" rather than "following a set of rules". By the same logic, I should be counting my financial transactions on my fingers because dang, they're my flesh and blood, attached to my very own body! -- rather than using this newfangled calculator contraption, or worse, these scary computer gadgets that omigosh use floating-point numbers and negative numbers and other ivory tower over-complex mathematical notions that my 1-2-3-pebbles brain is not willing to accept as reality.
I'm not going to defend the classical tradition as though it were flawless, or that it has already attained to perfection and cannot be improved anymore, because that's also nonsense. But I say, give me a symphony any day than the dull throbbing of primitive Oriental music.
I have nothing against Oriental music, BTW, and there are surely interesting qualities about it that are absent in the European tradition. But it seems far more logical to me that we should be integrating the two to produce something superior to both, rather than to denigrate one and embrace the other for no good reason other than that the edifice is in one's opinion "too regular", "too easy to replicate without any soul" (one could say the same about pandering slip-shod products for a hefty price in any field of endeavor -- there are charlatans everywhere, and one can find mediocrity anywhere if one looks hard enough), or, shall we say, "too perfect for my liking"? I don't buy the idea that one should deny the past because it's now the future. If that were how progressed happened, we'd still be living in mud huts and driving on wooden horse-cart wheels -- just made with "new" materials acquired one village over. Progress happens by building on top of what has gone before, not by throwing away the past and then proceeding to repeat its mistakes. I reject this over-romanticized notion that anything Oriental must necessarily be superior simply by virtue of its being different (I grew up in the Orient and I can tell you that it cannot even begin to compare with what Western classical tradition has achieved, and this notion that Oriental culture is somehow "better" is rubbish), or indeed, that anything different must necessarily be better because one tires of what remains the same.
|
|
|
Post by gx on Mar 12, 2019 22:11:05 GMT
Well, the Palestrina reference didn't quite fit to me.. But, I've heard live performances of Gamelan music.. and the rhythms in particular interlock quite finely.. But other than that, I'm not sure why you are singling out this one aspect ('orientalism' )-… Of course, it was a new sensation for his ears, .. and it did affect him.. I would posit a guess that it was Gamelan's static harmonic backdrop, … (and the suspension of the expected 'Polarity' - dominant/tonic tension) that affected him more.. I do believe he took what he needed, but then did integrate it in a way the very much enlarges the dialogue ever since.. I think the main thing he was saying was that 'good taste' does not come from following the rules.. I also love these bits: "Above all, we should protect ourselves from systems which are nothing but traps to catch dilettantes". Hilarious! " Their conservatory is: the rhythms of the sea, the wind in the leaves, and the thousand small noises to which they listen attentively, without studying arbitrary treatises".
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Mar 12, 2019 23:08:06 GMT
I think that the belief that Western music is the pinnacle is only true if that's your taste to begin with. There are other traditions that are just as organized, complicated and beautiful. If not more so.
An argument can be made that the Orient was extremely well developed while Europe was still living in mud huts. And it is when the West started reaching other parts of the world, that it poisoned what it touched(in the name of progress). It viewed everything and everyone else as inferior.
There was a passing fancy in Europe for all decor Oriental. But it was only for the very rich. As was classical music. Most of the population knew little of it.
I love this quote: "A century ago, to have taste meant nothing more than to support one’s views in a congenial manner." Something we are sadly lacking, today.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Mar 14, 2019 19:40:42 GMT
Bob Porter: I don't deny that other traditions could be just as beautiful. What I'm saying is that they never developed the field to the level of sophistication and grandeur that the Western classical tradition did. You do not find the equivalent of 100-person symphonies or large-scale productions like Wagner's Ring cycle anywhere else. I'm not pro-European traditions, btw; there is much to criticize in European things. But one cannot deny the fact that in things like music the level of development exceeds other traditions by at least an order of magnitude, if not more. I grew up hating music of all kinds, classical included. I found popularly-played music -- whether it was some excessively popular Bach "masterpiece", or some traditional Chinese whatchamacallit, or some Indian dance, or the latest from the pop scene -- trite and shallow, and in fact quite distasteful. It wasn't until I discovered the Beethoven symphonies that I began to realize there's more to music than what I had known. Music with depth, breadth, and a level of sophistication not found in popular media. Music with a level of internal consistency that keeps you discovering new things in it even after you have listened to it for the 100th time. That kind of music I do not find anywhere else except in the Western classical tradition. Everything else is just an emotional passage of the moment, here today, and tomorrow stale and old. Yeah they may be beautiful at the moment, but tomorrow the novelty has worn off and there's nothing left to see. This includes some of the classics, btw, esp. the overly popular ones. There's stuff that I wouldn't want to hear again after the first time because there's nothing new left to discover. But anyway, the whole Oriental thing is just a pet peeve of mine. It seems a prevalent notion that just because something is from the Orient it must be cool, because it's different from western culture and shrouded in some kind of mystic aura of exoticness or differentness. I find it just as ridiculous as googly-eyed Asians obsessed with everything Western, who consider that something is inherently superior just because it happened to be located in the west rather than the east. They worship America as though it's some sort of utopia, and consider all things American as somehow inherently superior. Until they actually come to America, of course, then they may discover to the shock of their lives that it isn't all that they imagined it to be. It's the same thing with westerners obsessed with the exoticness of all things Oriental. When the novelty wears off, there's really not that much left to be enthusiastic about. Then again, perhaps I'm just a cynical old grouch. *shrug*
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Mar 15, 2019 16:03:01 GMT
It's all good as long as you realize that your view of Beethoven is just that. Your view. Others might share it. But most of the world has no idea what a Beethoven is. It is totally possible to deny that Western culture is the pinnacle of anything. I think it is pretty great, but bigger (100 piece orchestra) is not automatically better. I would think that a truly superior culture would have figured out a way for everyone to get along, rather than endless wars, and all the other ways societies implode.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Mar 15, 2019 19:00:24 GMT
Whoa hold it right there. I was talking about Western music as being the pinnacle of musical development, not Western culture as a whole. That's not a discussion that I want to get into, because it will inevitably lead to flamewars, as seen on countless internet forums. So please let's keep our discussion to music. (But just for the record, I do not view Western culture as some kind of pinnacle... in fact, there are many things that may be regarded as signs that it has already reached its peak in the past and is well on the way on the gradual descent into decadence.) Anyway, as far as music is concerned, I agree that more is not necessarily better. But think about it. To have a functional 100-piece symphony orchestra, no matter how socially/politically/otherwise objectionable such a thing might be, requires a certain level of cultural development, without which such a thing won't be able to function at all. A ragtag bunch of 100 highschool acquiantances coming together for a jam session is great, but they are no symphony orchestra, no matter how you want to look at it. You may have a great party, but you won't get a coherent, consistent musical performance. To do that requires coordination, but coordination alone does not make a good symphony either. The music itself must be composed and performed in such a way that is coherent, internally consistent, and musically convincing. A lot of development is required for this to happen, for example a common notation so that players know what to play, an orderly cueing system so that players know when to play, musical structures that lend itself well to this sort of performance, and many other such things. You simply don't have these necessary ingredients in a group of random drummers in the forests of Indonesia. There may be elements of it present, but certainly not on the scale required to pull off such a thing as a 100-piece orchestral performance. Such a thing doesn't randomly happen by chance; it requires certain developments both culturally and musically. Conversely, its presence indicates a certain level of development and sophistication. There are also other signs like the level of sophistication in polyphony that I have not seen anywhere else. The very concept of polyphony in the sense of simultaneous, independent voices of equal importance, yet uniting into a single, coherent whole, is, as far as I can tell, unique to the Western classical tradition, and requires a level of sophistication that you simply cannot find in music of other cultures. Now, you may not like such kind of music, and that's your own prerogative; but again, such a thing does not and cannot happen by chance, and its presence is a strong indication of advanced musical development. A horse cart gets you to your destination just as a modern car does, but just because you can get to your destination by horse cart in no way diminishes the level of sophistication it takes to create such an intricate piece of machinery as a modern car. You may prefer to ride in horse cart rather than a car, and that's fine, but the existence of the car surely indicates a far more advanced level of technology than that required to produce a horse cart. And about Beethoven, I was only using him as an example. You know as well as I do that there are many others, and furthermore, ignorance does not negate what they have achieved in music. Just because a poor native in the forests of Papua New Guinea is completely oblivious of modern technology does not negate the existence of modern technology and the level of advancement thereof. Of course, as far as music is concerned, one might argue that the western classical tradition has developed in all the wrong ways and gone in all the wrong directions -- that's up for debate, but no matter how you look at it, you cannot deny the level of sophistication that went into all that "wrong" development. They may have gotten it all wrong, but they did develop it to a level far beyond what your "right" Indonesian drumming technique has ever achieved. Let's see a 100-piece Gamalan production that trumps the western symphony orchestra, and then we have something to argue about. I'm not holding my breath, though. Feel free to prove me wrong, if you can.
|
|
|
Post by gx on Mar 15, 2019 19:46:17 GMT
"group of random drummers in the forests of Indonesia. There may be elements of it present, but certainly not on the scale required to pull off such a thing as a 100-piece orchestral performance." I beg to differ, sir. You must admit, there is something symphonic (and fun) here.. and even 'modern'... Perhaps this could be like a passage from Ligeti? Well, HS, take a look at this. It is quite wonderful.. This music does require quite a bit of coordination from a large ensemble!
|
|
|
Post by gx on Mar 15, 2019 19:54:18 GMT
Also, HS, you must consider the rhythmic ability of the Indian musicians as surpassing the general rhythmic requirement of Western musicians… Also, ragas are theme and variation with 1/4 tones thrown in as well. some may say, rhythm is at least on par (of importance) as the notes chosen… I suppose it it as question of 'when' or 'what'.. Western music doesn't have an unrivaled place - in the realm of complexity.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Mar 15, 2019 22:21:05 GMT
gx: Upon seeing your reply I was expecting some mind-blowing counterexamples to my stance, but I'm sorry to say that I was quite disappointed. The monkey chant was basically ... a chant? I don't deny it's interesting to watch, for the first time. And I suppose it could be fun to perform. But I don't see any elements of it that suggests any manner of advanced musical development. Such rhythmic dances and chants have been developed in multiple cultures for millenia, and don't really offer much of the interest that caused me to not hate music in the first place. For example, there's nothing about the monkey chant that makes me want to come back to discover new things about it. I didn't find motivic development or cyclic self-references of themes. Or a dramatic arc. Etc.. It was just a chant / dance of the same level of sophistication as a folk story. Which isn't to diss it, but I didn't find anything that was developed beyond being merely the level of a folk story or repetitive chant, things that have been common across many cultures everywhere. Such things don't really stand out to me. And the second example you posted was basically a kind of continuo background rhythmic percussion accompaniment to a dance. Perhaps it does require quite a bit of coordination from a large group of performers, but after about the first 20-30 seconds or so of it, I've basically already heard all there is to hear from it, and everything else is just more of the same. Perhaps I'm just ignorant, but I didn't hear anything of interest that would make me want to come back and discover more. Do not mistake surface complexity for sophistication of underlying structure. The persistent rhythm and repetitiveness had a dulling, numbing effect on me, rather than stimulating curiosity and interest. I didn't find anything in the way of motivic development, dramatic arc, etc., that makes something worth listening to, to me. I can write a lot of 32nd notes that sound busy and complex, too, and perhaps even require a large band of performers to execute it, but that doesn't mean there's actually an interesting underlying structure beneath it. And yes, I'm quite aware some traditions sport 1/4 tones (or even more -- if you consider alternative tunings as microtonal music of some kind -- the sitar for example), and complex rhythms that rival or exceed western classical rhythms. But I've yet to find an example where these features were developed to the same level of large-scale sophistication found in, for example, a symphony. Western classical music may be "deficient" in not having 1/4 tones (at least among the classics) or complex rhythms, but it built upon this "deficient" foundation an enormously marvelous superstructure of structure, motivic development, drama, polyphony, etc.. Now imagine if the complex rhythms of Indian traditional music were to be developed to that level of sophistication -- if you were to have a symphony of 1/4 (or smaller) tones and complex rhythms complete with motivic development, drama, polyphony, a large ensemble of instruments with delicate balancing of timbres, texture, etc.. Perhaps such a thing already exists, but I haven't heard of it yet. And in any case, it would merely be a borrowing from western classical structures to apply to traditional music -- I still find no example where another other culture developed an analogous superstructure of musical richness on their own, i.e., invented and developed independently, not merely borrowing these elements after the fact from what has already been achieved in western music. If you find a fugue (or analogous complex structure) in microtones or complex rhythms in a non-western musical tradition, I'd love to hear it to prove myself wrong. So far I've yet to hear such a thing, and something tells me it will be a long time before I will, if I ever.
|
|
|
Post by gx on Mar 15, 2019 23:27:30 GMT
Yes, I get what you mean.. and I am playing devil's advocate.. But I do not think you are giving the exploration of rhythmic complexity - (as developed in India, for example) - its due weight. One could say that what they lack in harmonic modulation, they make up for in rhythm. I must say, applying the 'dramatic arc' model does not necessarily fit as a way to measure music from 'other places'… especially, considering the harmonic stasis of say, Indian music. But pieces - Ragas, do build in intensity - and from what I understand, have motivic Rhythm cells, that are 'modulating' - many times in poly rhythms.. But no, not exactly a fugue. At this point, I'll concede the argument,,, but '20 to 30 seconds' isn't very patient! Gosh.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Mar 15, 2019 23:49:18 GMT
I think you are missing the point here. Let's consider Beethoven, and his 100 piece orchestra. He wrote complex music for professional players to be heard by a select audience. Even today a select group who can afford tickets meet in an expensive building. This has nothing to do with the complexity of the music, of course, but it does speak to it's purpose. Now let's consider a group of drummers in West Africa. Maybe 7 Djembe players, four more on dununs, several on various bells and shekeres. Each one is playing a different specific rhythm. Some so complicated they can't be reliably notated. Musicologists have tried, and failed. One drummer might start with the basic beat. Another adds their beat. When the third starts, we begin to hear a little melody. That's because each drum is tuned to a different specific pitch, and various hand techniques produce different tones and effects. With each new player the melody changes and becomes more complex until the whole group is playing. On a signal they will change to a different set of rhythms. Nothing is random or improvised. It's all very much by design. Now add the singers and the dancers, and you have a very large group indeed. These are events that everyone around can and do enjoy. Not just a select group. If you were to watch a youtube video of just such a production I doubt that you would be able to pick out the rhythms and melodies because it's an extremely subtle skill. One our Western ears and brains are totally unprepared for. You would be quickly bored. Much like they would be listening to Beethoven. I took Lessons in African drumming. I learned how these systems work. Even after years of classes, I could not begin to play the things these drummers do. If you believe that they are just sitting around goofing off, you don't get it. This is their life, there culture. It's not a job like it is here in the West. I think Western music is the only music meant to be listened to. In every other culture, music is meant to be lived in, participated in, first hand. If you are looking something analogous to a fugue, you are looking for the wrong thing. The beauty of music is not in how complex it is, but rather how beautiful it is. It can be a single voice that produces a very stirring performance.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Mar 16, 2019 8:29:11 GMT
A century ago, to have taste meant nothing more than to support one’s views in a congenial manner. Today, this word has acquired such an extended reference, and functions in so many situations, that it amounts to little more than a kind of argument, a blow from the first in the American style – – a strong affirmation, without elegance. Following a natural tendency, “taste” – – formerly an indication of “nuance” and “subtlety” – – now appears in the context of “bad taste”, where forms and colors engage one another in extraordinary battles… Exactly when did Trump become POTUS? Portia, in “The Merchant Of Venice”, speaks of a music which each man carries within himself…”Woe to him who hears it not” she adds. Remarkable words, which should give cause for thought to those who, before listening to the singing within their souls, concern themselves with picking up the formulas which will best serve them.
This smells of a disingenuous polemic with ulterior motives to me. The "formulas" he speaks of are ones he knew and used and are ones all composers of concert music will have had to learn. It sounds as though he eschews all technique because he is genius and doesn't require it. In order to sing that inner voice out into the real world, one needs to learn. Debussy famously wanted to "sing" like a child but there is a difference between a mature cohesiveness that can be succinct and to the point and outright and indiscriminate bawling with random gurgles. He is quite right of course that we should not be slaves to any compositional system - the heart should always win out. One can't help wonder if he was inflating his own standing and work at that time. Given that he will have heard (listened?) of Schoenberg et al and he was certainly familiar with Igor's score for the Rite - both where musical paradigms totally alien to him with the latter about to receive its premiere -was he feeling a little insecure? Did he feel as though he'd lost a perceived musical hegemony? - he was certainly a trail blazer. History has quite rightly shown that he needn't have worried about his reputation and standing. ....."It will be our best source of support in the struggle against the barbarians, who have gotten much worse even since they started to part their hair in the middle". That says it all.....Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Barbarian...www.gramophone.co.uk/features/focus/responding-to-the-rite-of-springI agree with gx and Bob's sentiments about indigenous musics. When I was at the RAM, there was a concert given by top Indian musos to a packed hall full of students and professors. They first of all explained and then demonstrated complicated raga rhythms and described the improvising processes. They then went on to actually perform and there where often gasps from me and my fellow audience members at the sheer complexity and virtuosity of the playing. Would I listen to this and other indigenous music on a regular basis...no, because I also agree with Teoh ( fuguestate ). I too enjoy the compositional rigour of the great masterpieces in the western tradition. It's a cultural thing I suppose and western (classical) music does things differently, its intention is not always one of communal commonality. One thing is for sure though western music has got some things wrong ...I mean country music sucks (sorry). BTW fuguestate , listen to Messiaen's Turangalila Symphony for all things raga-related and rhythmically complex. A piece solidly in the great tradition but bursting forward into new territories. And.. if you want a complex fugue listen to this... www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnZkXAFOEDIT..on re-reading what I've written, I realise that Debussy was probably having a dig at newer practices at the time and probably not past practice, but still contend that he was asserting himself.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Mar 17, 2019 16:32:05 GMT
It's all getting distinctly colonial.
|
|