Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Thu, 6 Jul 2000 08:24:29 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Bernard Chasan wrote:
>And Joyce Wang replies:
>
>>Not at all. Since the entire process of atonal composition is inconducive
>>to producing anything resembling beauty, it does not take a leap to dislike
>>every last one of them.
>
>Ms. Wang unhappily exhibits a dogmatic intolerance which a bit
>surprising in a person who runs a concert series.
Several questions in my mind...must one like a work of art to appreciate
it? Is a painting like Guernica not art because it depicts the horror of
war? Similarly, I find a work like Schoenberg's Erwartung to be a brilliant
exploration of a troubled mind...and great art.
I would be most interested to know the origin of the notion that art must
be limited to that which has some subjective notion of "beauty." For me
art can open my mind to different perspectives, it can be troubling,
challenging, provocative, etc. It can touch my emotions and my mind.
While I may feel uncomfortable with another's anger, the expression of that
anger can open me to my own emotion and thinking, and, from my perspective,
that is ultimately good for the spirit.
As for intolerance in one involved in programming...
Gunther Schuller wrote an address to some radio broadcasters. He spoke
of overhearing a panel discussion at a convention of public radio station
staff. According to Schuller, he heard statements like, "vocal music is
death," "never play complete works," "never play anything dissonant,"
(guess they never discovered that Bach wrote plenty of dissonance), etc.
And people wonder why I don't support public radio...our symphony, etc.
Karl
|
|
|