Kevin Sutton ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

>David Malantic <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>I have started to collect and listen to, not to mention really enjoy,
>>CD's of serialist compositions from the mid 20th century and later.  So
>>far, I have purchased discs of Boulez, Stockhausen, Messiaen, Babbitt,
>>and Carter.
>
>Perhaps a couple of better read folk than I can correct me if I am wrong,
>but I don't regard any of the above mentioned composers as serialist.
>The Darmstadt school was more about chance (alieatory music) rather than
>structured serialist music, IIRC. I can't think of any Stockhausen that
>could be considered serialist, but am willing to stand corrected if need
>be.

Well, how could M. le Pedant resist such a temptation.

Certainly Messiaen and his pupils Stockhausen and Boulez all wrote serial
music. Did Non study with OM? He certainly wrote serial music. Indeed,
in the early 1950s, they were much enthralled with the notion of "total
serialism" - music in which *every* facet (not just pitch, but rhtyhm,
tempo, timbre, etc) would be governed by serial principles. They took
their inspiration from Webern rather than Schoenberg.

I believe the earliest work to attempt such a total serialism was
Messiaen's Mode de Valeur et d'Intensite (someone correct the spelling);
other examples  include Boulez' Structures I and Stockhausen's Kontra-punkte.

The introduction of chance elements in the late 1950s (e.g. the pianist's
own sequencing of the various chunks of Stockhausen's Klavierstuck XI)
was IIRC to a certain extent as a result of disillusionment with the
idea of total serialism, although the notion of some degree of serialism
(whether of pitch, rhythm or whatever) was employed by the Darmstadt
School for years.

I'd say the Darmstadt School was about chance until the mid-1960s. There
is no element of chance in the major works of Strockhausen and Boulez
from the 1950s and early 60s: Gruppen, Carre, Le Marteau sans Maitre,
Pli selon Pli....to name a few.

BTW the term "aleatoric" (from the Latin for dice) was I believe Boulez'
own. Adherents of Cage and his "chance" methods (which he employed years
before B & S) would have it that this was typically Boulez - having to
show off his learning and use a fancy word where the plain English
"chance" (JC's preferred term) would do just as well.

This help?

(BTW Babbit also makes a major appearance in the Grove article on
serialism, but I know little about him and have never been attracted
to his music)

Deryk Barker
[log in to unmask]