Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Sun, 1 Aug 1999 07:26:45 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Wes Crone:
>Why would anyone create a system to make themselves more creative.
No one did. And, for rigor, dodecaphony's a weak sister, just as "school"
voice leading is. You might as well say that standard 4-part harmonic
writing was invented to make people more creative.
On the other hand, maybe there's a legitimate point. Stravinsky said that
he didn't want absolute freedom. He had to put limits on himself before
he could begin to compose. If you can do anything, you have too many
decisions to make, and you can never make all of them.
>If the whole point of the 12 tone system was to create a new set of
>boundaries then why not just write tonal music. I mean...this is a
>system which createsa predetermined melody in some but not all respects.
There is no essential difference between dodecaphony and passacaglia, for
example, or from the "solfeg" pieces of the Tudor keyboard composers or
from the cantus firmus masses from the Renaissance. All of these things
have the same level of constraint. It's just that the particular set of
constraints differ.
>Certainly there are many fascinating works out there but I find it rather
>difficult that someone thinks to themselves "Wow...I just thought of the
>most beautiful 12 tone melody in my head!" "Wow that is gorgeous!"
You answer your own question below. But perhaps your assumptions of
what music should be caused you to ask it. I, for example, don't quite
understand why the row of tones has to be beautiful in itself or beautiful
simply aurally. I also don't see why melody (in a conventional sense -
and a tone row is *not* a melody) must be the basis of a composition. I
*like* a nice tune, but for me it's not the sine qua non. Most composers
generally called great don't often come up with astonishingly beautiful
melodies. It's what they do with basic musical material that makes them
great.
>Then again..maybe they do. One man's Picasso is another man's
>wallpaper.
Steve Schwartz
|
|
|