Steve Schwartz wrote in an ongoing exchange with Mats Norrman:

>>None which I know of.  I wouldn't even hold it against Beethoven that his
>>"Eroica" symphony was the model for Schoenbergs first [published] String
>>Quartett.
>
>The harm of Beethoven is that most people don't like the music.

The harm is not that most people don't like the music, but that most people
don't listen to it.  And that is more Malcolm Arnolds harm then Beethovens.

>It thus creates a schism between intellectuals and normal people.  This is
>bad. Intellectuals are bad.  Intellectuals are troublemakers.  Normal people
>are God's Gift.  Therefore, we really shouldn't have Beethoven.

Na, Interesting.  And this is the meaning of the saying "Wus?": A sheep
that reads Sartres existential philosophy wants to eat an apple, but the
apple is too big, so the sheep can't eat it, and then the sheep says
"Wuuuuuuuuuuuus????".  That's funny, don't you think?

>>>Schoenberg?
>>
>>Because no one in any of the 8 flats of my house, to whom I have played
>>Schoenbergs avanti-guard music likes it, and they are all normal people.
>
>Schoenberg isn't avant-garde.

Schoenberg is though avant-garde is anyone.  Schoenberg broke much more
with tradition than Strawinsky did for example.  And "Le Sacre" is much
more rooted in the tradition than "Erwartung", although "Le Sacre" inheld
many new things.  Should I compare these two composers and add Bartok to
the test just to get more prisma, then this can be wiewed from several
aspects which togehter will speak for the "rate" of avantguardism.
Examples on such aspects are:

*) Melody.  Which Bartok actually never left as the primary engine for
his music.  Schoenberg composed late romantic works more or later lesser
outpour throughout his carreer, but I don't need to stress that the
melodies in 12-tone music are seldom to be heard.  Strawinsky then falls
somewhere behind.  He composed what was his raw impressionism a.k.a.  "Le
sacre", and Serial Music, but also he was the first Neo-Classicist.

*) The use of Folk-Music.  Which has been an important source throughout
the whole Western History of Art Music even since the Notre Dame music
in 14th century actually.  Even the Vienna Waltz is of Folk origin, as a
diminutive of Croatian and Serb folkmusicrythms.  The use of folkmusic has
streched into our days, mainly with Mahler, who incorporated high with low
genialy, Verdi another example, as well as Janacek and Bartok.  Bartok took
interest in folk music for all over the Balkans (and also Russia,
Turkey and North Africa - studies which remained unfinsihed), which he
incorportaed in his music either as direct arrangements of melodies or
inspirations to completely own music.  Schoenberg on the other hand, totaly
dismissed folk music, for one reason as he meant that folk melodies didn't
allow larger homogenic structures to be built (it's worth noticing that
Schoenberg was a great fan of Mahler).  thereby he also broke with the
tradition and streched for something new (It is more the question of
attitude than the fact that he didn't use it).  He also differs from
Strawinsky here; "Erwartung" and "Le Sacre du printemps" are each others
pendyls and pendangs, the first piece composed 1909 the other 1913 (Though
Schoenbergs piece wasn't performed until 1924 or so).  Melody has a little
function in "Le Sacre", it is actually only used in something that can be
said to come close to traditional meaning in the first dance and the
opening of the second (which actually functions as an intermezzo and
"breathing" before the storm).  Else the huge orchestra function the work
throughout mostly as a entlongering of the percussion.  The rytmhs that
they stutter out however, are folkrythms.  Notice the undertitle of "Le
Sacre du Printemps": "Images from the hedony Russia".

*) Concept of the finished work.  Olivier Messiaen, who had much
interesting to say about music btw, used to tell a sort of anecdote which
went that they had brought a bushman from a noncivilized tribe in Africa
and Messiaen brought him to a classic symphony concert.  They played a
Beethoven symphony and after that Messiaen let the translator ask the
tribechief what he thought of it.  "I didn't like it", he said, "....except
for the very beginning".  It turned out that what he liked was when the
musicians tuned their instruments before the concert started.  Of course,
as usual, nobody understood what Messiaen meant.  But Olivier Messiaen was
a wise man, and here he talked about how Western musicians have wiewed
their own creative work in general, and specifically that there has always
in the history of West European music history been important for an artist
to "frame" his creation, so it is clearly a "enclosed" work.  He marks
where the piece starts and ends very clearly.  This has been a development
- in the way art develops - from Notre Dames Musics "Clausulae" and
onwards, and it has not been as much stressed in all genres and times; A
fugue by Bach for example, may well to times invoke in the listener a
feeling of that the music "just is there", but still Bach prepares the end
with organpoints, quicker themainsertings, and with other methods.  In the
Vienna Classicists it is all very clear.  The music says "Now we start",
but also "Here it ends", being veritable orgies of accordrepeats of tonic
and dominant in the ends of Beethovens 5th and 8th symphonies.  Thats the
end, and the rest is silence.  Similar can be found in litterature; see
Edgar Allan Poes "The Pure Elevation", or Mallarmes "Poesie Pure", or as
the saying goes: "Sonate que me veux-tu?".  If we here yet again compare
Strawinskys and Schoenbergs perhaps most avantguardist uttrances; "Le Sacre
du Printeps" vs.  "Erwartung", we find a fundamental difference: In the
last sacrificial dance of "le Sacre", we find a refrain with cuplets, a so
called "rondo", where in the second cuplet a varitable orgie in
percussionhits starts, onpowered by the deep strings bassi and celli.
Meanwhile the chug-chug-chug goes on with even tendences to imitation -
fugato - the tone D is ringing stronger and stronger in the winds.  This
more and more instisted D gives an effect of "end is coming" and cementing
of tonality.  The effect is overpowering, a deep breath - perhaps the young
dancer is just a symbolic sacrifice? But the music goes on, and the
reafrain comes with another colour and A, the quint of D, becomes
centraltone instead.  The hard clappering ring is congenial with the
uncompromising rythm and the volume increases.  The dancer has no chance,
she and the music stops in a high, swirrling tone and the final orchestra
hit fells her to the ground.  The sacrifice is completed.  So is the music.
- And then Schoenberg; there is a piece that in many ways is very similar
to "Erwartung", and that is "Begleitsmusik zu einer Lichtspielszene", which
is the music of an imaginery film from 1930, which also can be applied on
"Erwartung".  In the night in the forest in the moonshine, a woman enters.
She is nameless, like many women in the dramas of Strindberg, whom
Schoenberg was a great fan of, and seeks her way forward.  She falls over
a bush, gets up, tries go come further....finally she finds a bench, were
she tired rests.  Of her fragmentary stuttering we get to know that she
seeks her beloved, who has been disappeared for a while.  Under the bench
she sees a shadow which turns out to be a human body, she pulls in out in
the moonlight, and suddenly she realizes; "Its him!!".  She tries to push
away the insight, tries to let it be a maredream.  When she realizes the
truth, she turns through different phases of despair, aggressitivety -
according to the score she shall kick the corpse - bottomless sorrow,
resignation.

....This is a romantic horrorgarbagestory, but on a deeper level
"Erwartung" is a visiualizing of the unconscious strwams in the psyche -
Schoenebrg lived in Freuds city!  The text Schoenberg used is actually a
draft of a monologue; i.e.  he wanted a fragmentary text!  The music of
the piece then, leaps in and out, showing the states of them, following
the text as if there was no skin upon it at all (and there isn't), it is
ATONAL.  Except for full scales, repeat is made impossible from the rules
Schoenberg set up, and repeat also occurs only once in the piece (the
bridge between the 3rd and 4th part, where the songsoloist is quiet).
The last bars of the piece is the most confundatripliding of all: under
the womans last replic a chromatic upleaping movemnt starts in one half of
the orchetras, which in the last bar is followed be a descending movemement
in the other half of it.  Both movements are brought to the final barline,
and seems to disappear behind it, like in a dim.  Perhaps they represent
the womans half unconscious state, but also a consequence of the state
of nontonality, which not allows clear and conturesharp endings any more.
many pieces by Schoenberg ends in similar ways.  And what more is,
important works remained unfinished, like "Die jakobsleiter" and "Moses und
Aaron".  Perhaps because Strawinsky tied his piece ("le sacre") back to the
tradition stronger, it got greater success than Schoenberg (what is not
intended by me to deny Schoenbergs great influence), but now I gave you
some good arguments: don't come to me now and say that Schoenberg wasn't
avantguarde or didn't break with the tradition!

>But even if he were, so what?

Relax.  You don't need to care about it.  You don't need to care about
avantguardism, you don't need to care about Schoenberg or Beethoven or
music or Monster Trucks or anything.  Have a rich, interesting and happy
life!

>I have absolutely no interest in the avant-garde because it's avant-garde.

But I have.

>Avant-garde means very, very little in the great scheme of things, as does
>"traditional." Neither terms says anything about the quality of the music.

I agree the term doesn't say anything about the quality of the music.

>Rather, they simply conjure up boogymen in people's heads.  Everybody
>thinks they know what is meant, but if you actually get them to name
>examples, the results range from Nielsen to Moran.

Nielsen is a good answer.  His entertainment music entertains me, but
6th symphony is more advanced than one can think, and by no means easy.
Thereto in the avantguardes dress.

>>And now, those who like 12-tone will chime in and say "But all people in
>>MY house likes 12-tone".
>
>Numbers are absolutely irrelevant to art.  You don't listen to music --
>at least, I hope you don't -- simply because most people like it.

Here you are shackring with the cards, as usual. Numbers are not irrelevant
to art when the question is how art affects society.

>>>How does classical music -- listened to by a definite minority,
>>>if sales figures mean anything -- affect society at all?
>>
>>Mr. Schwartz, You make me sigh.  And probably that was the only point you
>>had with writing this.
>
>Well, you keep bringing it up.  You claim the music we listen to affects
>society.  I simply ask you the question.

Are you joking? Just the fact that it is "listened to by a definite
minority, if sales figures mean anything" means that it has a role in
affecting the society.

>>...  However I don't think you would ever systematisize a writer like
>>say Hafiz under "Western European tradition of art".
>
>Of course I would, because Hafiz has influenced that tradition, especially
>in the late 19th century and in the 1960s and 1970s US.  The "deep image"
>school of American poetry came under Hafiz's (and Persian poetry in
>general) influence, just as the late 19th century and the Twenties were
>influenced by Japan.

Apapapap Mr.Schwartz!  First of all be glad I said the Persian Hafiz.
Then Hafiz, who is the Perser, had a great influence on the Western Art
since Goethes "West-Oestlicher Divan" (Hm, is there a link between Sufism
and European Symbolism as well?), but you said yourself: "The "deep image"
school of American poetry came under Hafiz's (and Persian poetry in
general) influence".  How can Hafiz influence Western Art if he is a part
of it? You see, you answer my question yourself in your great ignorance -
Likewise in it, you put your finger on something very important.  I think
reading another Hafiz, the Egyptian 20th century I.M.Hafiz would be very
illuminating.  He sustained even his own feelings and thoughts just to
express what is Islamic and Arab in his poetry.  He is a good, if not even
extreme, example on how an artist "looks with his cultures eyes".  But the
observation you did in your great ignorance, without knowing you did, was
exactly why I love the Western Art so much.  That is that the Western Art
has ever since the Francian Empire showed that it is very receptive for
foregin cultural streams, which is can pick up and let itself be influenced
of, without loosing its own individuality and originality.  See how many
just musical artworks which shows fascination for the oriental and exotic:
"Montezuma", "Die Entfuehrung aus dem Serail", "Oberon", "Carmen",
"Parsifal", and yes "le sacre du Printemps".  Thats why I think Western Art
has - at least should have - a future; that is can incorporate and live and
let live so much of what is outside it.

>>The issue about eternal aesthetic principles is then a bit trickier.
>>The question is here why all horses look like horses, or better said: our
>>ability so percieve visuals and audials stem from that man developed in a
>>certain milieu under certain condictions.  Kierkegaard said that "nature is
>>incredibly detailed", and this is an important observation.  Variation
>>in detail has always been important as the world shall proceed.  Back to
>>percieving it is interesting to argue that there is a certain form on
>>conscensus, that I think you have to agree with.
>
>Agree with it?  I don't even understand it.

Then I guess when I have cut my hair or changed my clothes you take me for
another person, as I don't look exactly like I did last time you saw me.
Perhaps you are happy with that weltanschauung, but I don't think your life
is richer than mine in that case.

>>I think Mr.Schwartz would be so kind to agree on this meaning of
>>conscensus, but perhaps when Mr.Schwarz has read his daily list posts, he
>>walkes out in his kitchen and cooks a pile of shit for his plate instead
>>of a roast beef=?
>
>How clever of you.  You've been told by several people, not just by me,
>that we happen to like certain music that few others like (I won't make
>this incredibly complicated by pointing out that few others like classical
>music at all).  You choose to ignore it and argue for some sort of
>"naturalness" of aesthetic taste.

*Sigh* Mr.Schwartz! If you just could stop with your irritating habit of
juggling with the cards all the time.

>Indeed, then you -- by associative leap -- equate aesthetic taste with
>physical taste and, indeed, with physical harm.

Aesthetic taste vs. Physical harm: If you don't know why shit smells
disguisting (or perhaps is it nice to you?) I think you shall eat a pile of
it, and then listen to what your stomach says after that, perhaps you learn
anything from it too?

>>Jo, as a paradigm of artistic goodness can only be said to be actively
>>valid bound in time and geographical location.  You said this with the
>>words: "It seems to me that the paradigm is only historically, rather
>>than Platonically, true, only for a brief moment".  I mean roughly the
>>same thing.
>
>In that case, I question the aesthetic (rather than the historical) value
>of a paradigm, valid for, perhaps, only months.

In that case, I question if you actually want anything else than winning a
discussion, fair or foul.

Mats Norrman
[log in to unmask]