Jeremy Wright:

>I think that atonality is thought...tonality is not thought, it is the
>natural form of things.  It just sounds right to people...Tonality existed
>first, and then began to learn more and more about music, and what could be
>done with it...

Perhaps tonality is custom and atonality is not custom.  Tonality didn't
exist first.  For example, a contemporary to Dufay would find rough and
stupid our classical way of finishing a piece:  dominant seventh - tonic
with 3rd.  He would find horribe the 7th and excessive the 3rd at the
tonic (and even worst if it would be a minor 3rd.).  When I began to study
harmony, some 9th and 11th chords (all of them perfectly inside the tonal
system) were very dissonant and ugly to me, but that impression changed
over the years.  Now I find them very natural.  The same will happen to you
with atonal (or highly chromatic) music if you play or listen it during a
certain period of time (which not necessarily must be too long).

>Because 9 times out of 10, as I pointed out, atonal music is more
>thought then emotion.  And that is exactly the problem.  Most of the
>music listening public wants and needs an emotional side to music.

I disagree.  Try "Wozzeck", or Webern's Sypmphony op. 21, or his Five
pieces for String Quartet, or Lutoslawski (especially "Funeral Music for
Strings" or his String Quartet).  Going forward, Ligeti's "Atmospheres" or
"Lux Aeterna" are works adressed to your senses rather than to your reason
(if we admit such distinction).  There's a lot of possible works in this
list, and I'm sure that you would enjoy many of them.

Pablo Massa
[log in to unmask]