Music Writing by Carson Arnold
Music Writing by Carson Arnold
SOUND FOR SALE?
Writing about Milton Babbitt or John Cage is boring and I'm unclear why. Come to think of it, even though Cage has been one of my significant influences, he and others are probably one of the last resorts I'd care to put on print. I'd just be one more fool thrown on the pile analyzing pieces that have been openly self-explanatory and discussed by the artist themselves throughout an entire century. Another essay thrown on the pile debating the aesthetic and property of "sound". My god man, leave the poor subject alone. Let it be what it is. Sound is the song of the individual. The natural sparkle in each of us that doesn't require mortality's talent. The timeless space of eternity that will everlast far beyond man's design of controlling perception. Its independence is less than perfect but far more than utopian. The song does not sing without sound, yet, sound will always sing without the song. Forever free of destructed customs. Constantly never listening, constantly always heard.
With all this natural feedback, the question arises whether the belief in "sound" requires us to be indeed engaged in expressing and promoting it via instrument, when it is always occurring in events not necessarily established by our principles. I once wrote in a journal that my prime concern was "subtracting principle from sound". I then realized that sound exists under no origin of principle, no moral crucifixion, just the burning chaos of nature once described by Yeats as "a sudden flaming word". So in other words, by advocating the abstraction of sound, are we liberating it for the purpose of educating ears, or by demonstrating and processing it, will it in time reflect just another piece of our conventionalism? I call the false of all my influences to ask, why tamper with the joints of nature that have and always will consistently surround us and include us? Why emancipate things to reinvent them to find they've always been there since the beginning? In other words, why does "sound" of all things in this world need to be liberated when it's one of most elementary parts of fundamental universal life? Is this a question of seeking newer expression or a question of what we have politically chosen to accept as standards? The second, being an entirely different story involving an entirely different motive.
Without Cage and other thinking rebels of composition (I use Cage as a wide example), music would not be as remarkable. Though still, writing about Milton Babbitt or Cage is boring and I'm certain I know why. They don't need to be talked about. Not any more at least. Release them into the spirit their work sought to be ! Free! Finally obstructed under no stationed paramount. "Sound" roaming no longer as a spectacle, but rather the essence of universe whirling inside us all. For we too are all instruments are we not? Only the capabilities within each of us are endlessly denied and oppressed by the colonies of the song. Our constant starvation to be entertained under idle command. Sound will (and in our case, could ) threaten this supremacy, immediately destructing the badge of talent and academics (what talent?). It introduces and invites the individual to finally take center stage, a fatal thought for musicians tucked away acting out an appeal for mass reception. And yet, through an entire century promoting the organic of sound and music surrounding us- from Cage to Partch or Roland Kirk to Albert Ayler- we still dock and harbor applause. Packing ourselves in attendance under these legends we've chosen to cut, paste, and model. Categorizing them for the benefit of our own cliche narcissism. Possessing them without at least practicing the social and domestic belief of the composer's work. Am I wrong, but isn't this what they were all about? Never listening, always heard?
Our reservation has led me to believe that, adapted in time, their work ages as incomplete. Surely successful in broadcast, but a failure on our part by decorating and waxing its availability. Sound for sale? Do you realize how ridiculous this is, and sounds ? Still analyzing the evolution of Cage's 4 33"? This is total death to the ear, nevermind absolute irony to the craftless expression Cage spirited within the piece. Is it so difficult for people to understand silence? Or would this destroy the conditioned lullaby we've come to rattle to? Friends, it's a mistake to conclude that the effect of recorded sound is abstract , or in other terms, esoteric. Who ever is composing it is not necessarily producing the message that it's contrary to music's uniform, but rather illuminating the innocence of sound that is us and around. This is for sale?
Given so, it'll be forever boring to write about Cage or Milton Babbitt when all the words can be heard. Simple as that. Thank you for not letting me write about them.
-Carson Arnold Janurary 14, 2003copyright 2003 Carson Arnold
H(ear) is an online music column consisting of interviews, articles, and investigations written by Carson Arnold. As a freelance writer for various magazines and liner notes, living in the woods of Vermont with his family, Carson widely encourages one to submit their art, writing or any interesting piece of material that you would like to share. H(ear) is accepting both promos and demos for review or any other valuable music-related subjects. If you wish to make a comment or would like to receive H(ear) weekly by email please contact Carson at [email protected]
Thanks and enjoy!
See other music reviews at Track
Home / About Longhouse / Books for Sale / Reviews and Resources / Contact Us/To Order / Write Us